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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the data source (FRED) and mentions that setting an API key increases rate limits. However, it does not mention whether the tool is read-only, any potential side effects, or rate limits without the key. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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, consisting of two sentences that immediately convey the tool's purpose, coverage, and a practical note about rate limits. Every word adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with key information.

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 has no output schema, so the description should explain what the return values look like. It does not describe the output format, pagination, or error handling. For a data-fetching tool with multiple actions, this is a significant gap.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema; it lists example indicators and mentions the API key, but these are already implied by the schema's description fields. No additional semantic depth is provided for parameters.

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 provides macro economic calendar and indicators, listing specific examples (CPI, Non-Farm Payrolls, FOMC decisions, etc.) and the data source (FRED). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like news_feed or tradfi_news, which focus on news rather than structured economic data.

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 clear context for when to use (to fetch macro economic data) and mentions setting FRED_API_KEY for higher rate limits. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives for related tasks like news or technical analysis, which is acceptable given the sibling list implies those uses.

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