NFIP Flood Insurance Claims

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. The description adds context about the source and return fields, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations and schema offer.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core function and listing key return fields. Every sentence adds value; no fluff.

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, rich annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is adequate. It covers purpose, key parameters, and source, though it could mention pagination implicitly via the limit parameter.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the description adds little beyond saying 'by state and year.' No additional syntax or format details are provided 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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves NFIP claims by state and year, specifying the returned fields (flood zone, payments, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling FEMA disaster tools (e.g., assistance, declarations) by focusing on claims data.

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 mentions that the tool is essential for flood risk assessment and insurance analysis, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like assistance or declarations, or provide exclusions.

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