describe-gov-data-tool

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, non-open-world. The description adds genuine context the annotations cannot: it is FREE, reads a local bundled catalog, makes no network call, performs no run, and incurs no charge. That cost/side-effect disclosure is exactly the kind of value beyond structured fields.

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 tight sentences with zero filler; the core action and the 'when to use' directive are front-loaded, with cost reassurance last as supporting detail.

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?

With no output schema, the description should say what comes back, and it does — 'the full input schema and documentation' for the requested tool. Given a one-parameter, read-only intro-spection tool, this is essentially complete; only error behavior for an unrecognized tool name is unstated.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter is documented with an example ('noaa-slr-inundation-threshold-screener'). The description adds only the domain context that the value must be one of 123 catalog tools, so the schema does the heavy lifting — baseline 3.

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?

Specific verb (return) + resource (full input schema and documentation) + scope (any one of 123 tools in the catalog). Clearly distinguishable from the sibling run-gov-data-tool, which executes rather than describes.

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 states the calling condition: 'Call this before run-gov-data-tool so the input is correctly shaped.' It names the alternative sibling and the ordering relationship, so an agent knows exactly when to reach for this tool instead of running directly.

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