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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: data source (World Bank CPI), global country coverage, per-call pricing, and endpoint. No contradiction with 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?

The description is a single dense sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Adjust an amount between years using CPI') and appends only high-value metadata: source, pricing, and endpoint. No wasted 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?

For a simple lookup-style calculation tool with full schema coverage and non-destructive annotations, the description provides all essential context: what it calculates, the data source, country scope, and cost. No output-schema expectations are stated, but the adjusted-amount outcome is implied and unlikely to confuse an agent.

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 fully documents each parameter. The description reinforces the 'any country' aspect relevant to the country parameter and the year-to-year adjustment relevant to from/to, but adds no parameter-level details beyond the schema.

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: 'Adjust an amount between years using CPI'. It also differentiates from generic conversion tools by noting 'any country, not just US', making the tool's purpose and scope clear.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: adjusting monetary amounts across years via CPI. It does not explicitly name alternatives like v1_fx or v1_unit_convert, but the CPI-specific framing is sufficient to route an agent appropriately.

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