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

Annotations cover read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds contextual traits annotations cannot express: no authentication required, a 60 calls/minute per-IP rate limit, and a data-refresh cadence of at most once per business day. These are exactly the operational facts an agent needs before scheduling repeated calls.

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 dense paragraph that front-loads the payload and the return fields before falling back to defaults, limitations, and operational notes. Every sentence carries information, though the operational tail could be marginally tightened.

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 isn't required, yet the description still previews the returned fields. Combined with coverage of defaults, source limitation, auth, rate limits, and refresh cadence, nothing an agent needs to call and interpret this tool is missing.

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 both parameters (from/to patterns and defaults) are fully documented in the schema itself. The description only restates the 'between two dates' semantics and the 60-day default, adding no format or edge-case detail beyond the schema. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (scheduled INDEC releases) with explicit scope (between two dates) and enumerates the report families and returned fields. An agent can tell this apart from get_series/search_series, which return data rather than a forward-looking schedule.

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?

Gives concrete usage scenarios ('when is the next inflation figure out', 'know whether a value is about to change') and states the default window and the 'only INDEC for now' limitation. It stops short of naming sibling alternatives (e.g., get_series for values) or stating when not to use it.

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