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

There are no annotations, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses that the tool returns a list with descriptions and is non-destructive by nature, but it does not mention pagination, response size, or whether any filtering exists. This is acceptable for a simple listing tool but leaves some behavior unstated.

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 tight sentences with no filler: the first states the action and scope, the second gives a direct usage directive. Every sentence 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?

For a zero-parameter discovery tool, the description is complete enough: it names the data sources, says descriptions are included, and tells the agent to call it before querying. No significant missing information prevents correct invocation.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers the input surface. The description adds useful context about what the returned list contains, which serves the discovery purpose without needing parameter-level detail.

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 ('List') and resource ('indicators this server supports'), and explicitly scopes the content to World Bank + US BLS. It is clearly distinct from the sibling query tools because it is the discovery entry point.

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 instructs the agent to call this to discover what can be queried, which establishes when to use it before querying specific indicators. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the discovery-vs-query distinction is implied strongly enough.

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