get_state_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic operation and does not mention output format, error handling, read-only nature, or other behavioral traits.

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 extremely concise: a single purpose sentence plus a parameter breakdown. It is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place with no waste.

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?

For a simple single-parameter tool, the description sufficiently covers the purpose and parameter semantics. It lacks explicit return format details, but the phrase 'facility counts by type' implies the output structure, making it reasonably complete.

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?

The schema provides only 'state_code' with no description. The description adds critical semantics: 'two-letter state abbreviation, e.g. "CA"', fully clarifying the parameter format and example.

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 retrieves facility counts by type (fire, police, EMS, hospital) for a state. This specific verb-resource-scope combination distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on station lookups, lists, and jurisdictions.

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 implies use for state-level summary data but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor provide exclusions. It is adequate for a simple tool but lacks direct guidance.

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