US Government Open Data MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions searching and the type of content (CBO reports with distributional analysis), but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, pagination behavior, rate limits, authentication needs, or what the response format looks like. The description adds some context about CBO's role but misses key operational details.

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 extremely concise—just two sentences that directly state the tool's purpose and the type of content it searches for. Every word earns its place with zero waste or redundancy.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a search tool. It doesn't explain what the search returns (e.g., report metadata, full text, links), how results are structured, or any limitations. The mention of CBO's scoring role adds some context but doesn't compensate for missing behavioral and output information.

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 already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema. It mentions 'bill name or topic' which aligns with the query parameter description, but provides no additional syntax, format, or usage details.

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 searches for Congressional Budget Office reports through GovInfo, specifying the resource (CBO reports) and verb (search). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on CBO reports rather than other government data, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with similar search tools like 'govinfo_search'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions CBO's role in scoring tax bills, but doesn't specify when this tool is preferable to other search tools like 'govinfo_search' or 'congress_search_bills', nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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