predict_recompete

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. Description adds 'Deterministic, free' and 'Expiration/option signals reflect reported data and may lag,' providing extra context about behavior and data freshness beyond 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?

Few sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, then details. No redundant phrases. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 source (USAspending), filter options, enrichment, return fields (days-until-expiration, urgency), and behavioral notes (deterministic, free, data lag). Completes the picture for a retrieval tool with nested filters and enrichment.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already explains all parameters. Description summarizes filter types but adds no significant new meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool discovers expiring federal contracts as recompete opportunities, with specific filtering and enrichment options. Distinguishes from sibling tools like find_incumbents or get_solicitation by focusing on recompete detection.

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?

Implies usage when needing recompete opportunities, but no explicit guidance on when not to use or how it compares to siblings. Lacks exclusionary criteria or alternative tool references.

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