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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/destructive annotations, it discloses that results are ordered newest-first, that the response explicitly includes the date of the most recent observation, and that the underlying frequency is quarterly with a lag. These are meaningful behavioral traits that shape expectations. It does not contradict the annotations.

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?

Three tight sentences, each carrying substantive information: core behavior, data lag caveat, sibling pointer and optional date window. No filler or restatement of the title.

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?

The tool is well covered given the presence of an output schema and annotations: purpose, ordering, lag, date window, and sibling routing are all present. The only completeness gap is the undocumented limit parameter, but the default value in the schema partially mitigates the risk.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters. It covers since/until by giving the YYYY-MM-DD format and saying they narrow the window, and implies ticker is the key selector. However, the limit parameter is never explained, leaving its meaning (likely max observations) to inference.

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 states a specific verb and resource: retrieve one macro series by ticker, sorted newest first, and includes the date of the most recent observation. It differentiates from search_macro_indicators, which is for finding a ticker, and from the other market/report siblings.

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?

It explicitly directs the agent to use search_macro_indicators to discover the ticker, providing a clear alternative for a different need. It also warns that data are quarterly and lagged (newest point is a quarter end, never today), which helps the agent judge when this tool is appropriate.

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