US Government Open Data MCP

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns with this by using 'Get' (a read operation). The description adds context beyond annotations by specifying the data source (BRFSS) and topics, which helps the agent understand the tool's scope and behavior, though it doesn't detail rate limits or auth needs.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by additional details. It is appropriately sized with two sentences that efficiently convey necessary information without waste.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, annotations cover safety (read-only), and schema fully documents parameters. The description adds context on data source and topics, but lacks output schema details (e.g., return format). It is mostly complete but could benefit from more behavioral context.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents parameters. The description mentions topics and data dimensions but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining parameter interactions or default behaviors. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('Get') and resources ('adult obesity, physical inactivity, and fruit/vegetable consumption by state from BRFSS'), and distinguishes it from siblings by specifying the data source (BRFSS) and topics, which are unique among the listed tools.

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 implies usage by listing topics and data dimensions (state, race, age, income, education), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. It lacks direct guidance on context or prerequisites.

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