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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It provides no information about return format, pagination, performance, or side effects. The phrase 'data center macro indicators' gives no behavioral insight; the agent cannot predict what will happen when calling it.

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 concise sentence with no redundant phrasing. It front-loads the core resource and immediately mentions the optional filters. It is efficient, though very brief.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a sparse description, the tool is inadequately specified for an agent. It does not explain what data is returned, how to use the filters effectively, or how it relates to siblings like get_macro_indicator_data or get_macro_tags. The agent would likely need to probe the tool to understand it.

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 description says the data is 'optionally filtered by tag/source/search', which confirms these parameters are filters. This adds meaning beyond the schema, which only lists names and defaults. However, it does not explain each parameter's accepted values or behavior, and with 0% schema coverage, more detail would be expected.

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 the resource is 'data center macro indicators' but does not specify what exactly is returned (list, values, etc.) or how it differs from siblings like get_macro_indicator_data or get_macro_tags. While it is not a tautology, it is vague and leaves the agent unsure of the tool's scope.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only mentions optional filters, but does not explain any context such as when filters are needed or how this compares to related macro tools. The agent is left to infer usage.

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