County Business Patterns Tool

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, confirming safe, idempotent behavior. The description adds value by specifying that the data is annual and covers the number and types of businesses, which informs the agent about the temporal and scope characteristics. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence states the core function and the second adds the data types covered. Information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

The description adequately explains the tool's purpose and data elements, but it omits important usage constraints, such as the requirement for a state FIPS code when geography is 'county'. With no output schema, the agent does not know the structure of the response. While the tool is simple, these gaps reduce completeness.

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%, with each parameter having a description. The description mentions using NAICS code, geography, and business size, which correspond to parameters, but adds no additional detail beyond what the schema already provides. Therefore, it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 identifies the tool as retrieving County Business Patterns data, a specific government dataset. It states the verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'business statistics from County Business Patterns', then lists the types of data (establishment counts, employment, payroll) and dimensions (industry, geography, business size). This makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 like annual_business_survey_tool or economic_census_tool. It does not mention scenarios where CBP is preferred, nor does it caution against misuse. The agent is left to infer appropriateness from the dataset name alone.

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