search-gov-data-tools

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, not destructive, closed-world). The description adds cost/latency context beyond annotations: 'FREE: reads a catalog bundled with this server — no network call, no run, nothing charged.' This is valuable non-structured behavior. It doesn't describe result ordering or pagination, keeping it below 5.

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, front-loaded with purpose, then routing, then cost note. Slightly dense with examples but every clause earns its place. No filler.

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?

Covers purpose, routing, cost, and that it returns matching names with descriptions. Since no output schema exists, the description appropriately signals the return shape. The only gap is result ordering/pagination behavior, which is minor for a catalog search.

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 both parameters are fully documented in the schema (query match targets, limit default/max). The description adds nothing beyond the schema about parameters, so baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('Search the full catalog of 120 US government data tools') with the exact matching fields (keyword, agency, topic) and example queries. Clearly distinguishes this discovery tool from the sibling run/describe tools and the dedicated domain screeners.

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 routes the agent: 'Use this first when the task is not covered by one of the dedicated tools above.' This is a precise when-to-use cue with an implicit when-not-to-use (when a dedicated tool fits), which is exactly the routing the siblings demand.

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