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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral detail — default of today for date, and that series mode returns only today's changed points rather than arbitrary dates — but it leaves ambiguity about whether a supplied date affects series mode, and says nothing about result ordering or pagination behavior.

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?

A single dense sentence with the primary mode front-loaded and the conditional series mode following. No filler, though the compressed parenthetical syntax borders on cryptic for first-time readers.

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 six-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description should say more about what a result record looks like and how pagination interacts with each mode. The core dual-mode semantics are covered, but an agent must infer several operational details.

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?

With 50% schema coverage, the description usefully clarifies that productId must be paired with coordinate to resolve a single series, which the schema only hints at. It still leaves coordinate and the limit/offset pagination parameters unexplained beyond their defaults, so it only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 names a specific resource and two concrete modes: tables updated on a date, and new data points for one series. This is clearly distinct from siblings like get_series_info or get_sdmx_data, though the phrasing 'What StatCan released' is slightly informal and takes a moment to parse.

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 does explain how parameters select the mode (date for release tables; vectorId or productId + coordinate for one series), which is genuine usage guidance. However, it never states when to prefer this over get_sdmx_data or get_series_info, and gives no exclusions or prerequisites.

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