Get Hud Fmr

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Return' implies a read, but the description says nothing about whether entity_id must reference a geography or property, what the bedroom parameter does, or any failure modes for invalid ids. For a lookup tool with zero annotation coverage this is thin.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, so sizing is efficient. It is arguably too terse for a tool whose key parameter is undefined, but it wastes no words.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, which lightens the burden. Still, with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the definition leaves entity_id and bedrooms unexplained, so an agent lacks enough to call it confidently.

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 0%, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It references entity_id only obliquely and never mentions the bedrooms parameter (default 2), whose meaning and allowed range are entirely undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Return HUD Fair Market Rent'), which is far more precise than the sibling tools' more generic data lookups. However, it offers no differentiation from siblings like get_cbsa_population or get_fred_series, and 'entity id' is an undefined abstraction that leaves the target of the lookup ambiguous.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. The agent is not told what an 'entity id' is or where one comes from, nor when this HUD-specific rent data is preferable to the other data-retrieval siblings.

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