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

The description goes beyond annotations by disclosing cost (2 credits), authentication requirement, source licensing, and a changelog note about removed indices. This adds valuable behavioral context without contradicting the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false).

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, well-structured paragraph that front-loads the main purpose and then concisely covers contents, sources, cost, auth, optional parameter, and a removal note. Every sentence provides useful information with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description gives a thorough overview of what the tool returns (FRED series, forex pairs, oil/gas), the historical option, and important caveats. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to decide when and how to invoke the tool.

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 single optional parameter is fully documented in the input schema (100% coverage). The description briefly repeats the history=30d behavior but adds no new details beyond what the schema already states, so it does not significantly compensate or enhance parameter understanding.

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's action: 'Premium composed macroeconomic snapshot in one HTTP call.' It lists the specific contents (FRED series, forex pairs, oil/gas) and distinguishes itself from siblings by being a composed macro snapshot rather than a single-asset or economic data point tool.

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 the tool: for a one-call macro snapshot with cost, auth, and optional history details. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, lacking direct comparison to siblings like tf_economic_data or tf_forex.

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