APIbase

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It successfully discloses the data source 'Regulations.gov' and licensing 'Public domain', and lists returned fields (title, abstract, etc.), but omits rate limits, auth requirements, or error behaviors.

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 efficient sentences: first establishes action, resource, and return fields; second provides licensing context. No redundant words, front-loaded with the verb, every clause earns its place.

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 no output schema exists, the description compensates by explicitly listing returned fields (title, abstract, agency, etc.). It adequately covers a simple single-parameter read operation, though it could mention the response format structure.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema fully documents the document_id parameter including format example. The description aligns with this by mentioning 'by ID' but does not add additional semantic context beyond the schema, warranting the baseline score.

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 uses specific verb 'Get' with clear resource 'US federal regulatory document' and scope 'by ID'. It distinguishes from sibling 'legal.regulations.search' by emphasizing ID-based retrieval versus search.

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 phrase 'by ID' implies this tool requires a document identifier (likely from search), and the schema parameter description confirms this, but the description lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus the search sibling or prerequisites.

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