spraay_research_demographics_census

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by stating the cost ($0.001 per call) and reinforcing the read-only nature. This provides behavioral transparency beyond annotations, though it does not detail error handling or pagination.

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 concise (two sentences, four clauses) and front-loaded with the purpose. It efficiently conveys key information such as cost and usage instruction, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 the tool's simplicity (4 string params, none required) and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate. It covers cost, readonly nature, and geographic scope. Missing details like return format are handled by the output schema.

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 basic descriptions for each parameter. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, merely advising to pass fields directly. With high schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 provides 'US Census data by state, county, or zip,' which is specific and distinct from sibling tools. The verb 'research' in the name and the explicit mention of geographic scopes make 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 includes a usage instruction ('Pass the listed fields directly as typed arguments') and notes cost and read-only status, which helps with usage decisions. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as the related sibling 'spraay_research_demographics_datasets'.

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