describe-gov-data-tool

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context — that it reads a catalog bundled with the server, makes no network call, and incurs no charge — which materially affects an agent's willingness to call it speculatively.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what it returns, then the ordering instruction, then the cost disclosure. No filler, and the most decision-relevant facts come first.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description states exactly what comes back (full input schema and documentation), and the no-cost/no-network disclosure removes the main hesitation about calling it. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 single 'tool' parameter is already documented with an example. The description adds the constraint that the value must be one of the 120 tools in this server's catalog, which meaningfully narrows valid inputs beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (Return) and resource (the full input schema and documentation) with an exact scope: any one of the 120 tools in the catalog. An agent can immediately tell this apart from run-gov-data-tool, which actually executes a tool.

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?

Explicitly instructs to 'Call this before run-gov-data-tool so the input is correctly shaped,' which gives clear ordering context relative to the sibling. It stops short of naming when this tool is unnecessary (e.g., when the schema is already known), so it is clear but not fully exhaustive.

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