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

Annotations provide only openWorldHint: true, which is minimal. The description adds substantial behavioral context: it details the billing model (per data unit, with a meter) and the scoping of the data (e.g., exclusions), which goes beyond the annotation. It could mention whether it's read-only, but the billing info is valuable.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose, then provides coverage and exclusions, and ends with typical usage examples and billing. Every sentence serves a purpose without redundancy.

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?

With a rich schema and output schema present, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, what it excludes, how pricing works, and common query patterns. It is complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 schema already documents each parameter well. The description adds value by explaining the query intent and providing examples, though it does not add much on parameter specifics beyond what the schema already states. Baseline 3 is elevated to 4 due to the clear examples and context.

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 queries macroeconomic indicators for specific regions, listing covered categories (GDP, income, consumption, etc.) and explicitly excluding single-industry company counts and POI details. This distinguishes it from siblings like gov_data_enterprise_scale and gov_data_population, which focus on other domains.

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 provides explicit examples of typical queries and clearly states what is not covered (single-industry company counts, POI details), with alternative tools suggested. This helps the agent decide when to use this tool versus others.

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