US Demographics Data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. Description adds value by stating the data source (Census ACS 5-year estimates) and the geographic scope, but does not contradict annotations. For a safe read tool, this is sufficient.

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 concise sentences that front-load the key purpose and data source. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values are documented. Description covers purpose, data source, and typical use cases. Some details like the geographic hierarchy (state vs county) are implied but clear enough for a well-annotated read tool.

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 for its three parameters. Description does not significantly add beyond the schema (e.g., it mentions state_fips and county_fips implicitly via 'any US geography'). 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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves demographic composition for US geographies, listing specific attributes (age, race, Hispanic/Latino, education) and source (ACS 5-year estimates). It distinguishes from sibling tools like census.data.economic or census.data.population by its focus on demographics.

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?

Description provides context for use cases ('market research, policy analysis, neighborhood profiling') but does not explicitly specify when to use this tool over siblings or when not to use it. However, the distinct focus on demographics implies appropriate use.

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