usda_ag_query

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds a concrete behavioral limit, "Max 50,000 records," which is not encoded in the schema and is valuable for agents expecting unbounded results.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the record limit plus count-first guidance are delivered immediately.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a flexible query tool with eight optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides the critical limit and a size-control strategy. It does not mention result format, pagination behavior, or whether at least one filter is expected, leaving some ambiguity for agents invoking it blindly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the eight parameters are already well documented in the input schema. The description adds little parameter-specific meaning beyond "any combination of filters," which does not elaborate on valid combinations or dependencies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: "Custom query to USDA NASS QuickStats" and emphasizes flexibility with "any combination of filters." This clearly differentiates it from more specialized USDA siblings like usda_crop_data and usda_prices, though it doesn't name them explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives one practical usage rule: "Use usda_ag_count first for large queries." However, it does not explain when to choose this tool over the specialized USDA datasets, nor does it mention the referenced usda_ag_count tool in the sibling list, making that guidance less actionable.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.