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

With no annotations, the description provides basic context: source (FRED) and that it returns multiple indicators. It does not disclose rate limits, data frequency, or return format, but the tool is read-only and parameterless, so the lack of detail is acceptable though not thorough.

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 clear sentence that efficiently conveys purpose and source. No wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and source. It does not describe the return format, but given low complexity, this is sufficient. It could mention data recency or scope.

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 input schema has zero parameters and 100% schema coverage. The description adds meaning by naming the specific indicators retrieved, which goes beyond the empty schema. Baseline is 4, and the description meets it well.

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 retrieves multiple key economic indicators (GDP, CPI, rates, employment, housing) in one call from FRED. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_gdp or get_rates by offering a combined endpoint, but could be more specific about the full set of indicators included.

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 phrase 'in one call' implies using this tool when multiple indicators are needed, avoiding repeated calls to sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose alternate specific tools instead, such as when only one indicator is required.

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