fetchFetch full data for a result id returned by search (format: 'indicator//'). Returns the recent observations and the full citation as text.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| url | Yes | ||
| text | Yes | ||
| title | Yes | ||
| metadata | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already label the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds what is returned (observations and citation) but does not disclose edge cases like invalid IDs or data freshness. It adds some value beyond annotations.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and format, no unnecessary words. Every sentence serves a purpose.
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 simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description adequately explains the input format and output contents. The term 'recent observations' is somewhat vague but acceptable given the output schema likely provides structure.
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 coverage is 0% (no parameter description), but the description provides the expected format ('indicator/<key>/<ISO3>'), which adds critical meaning beyond the raw type 'string'.
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 verb 'Fetch' and the specific resource 'full data for a result id returned by search', including the required ID format. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search and get_indicator.
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 explicitly links usage to results from search, providing clear context. It does not explicitly list when not to use or alternative tools, but the context is sufficient for correct selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Tools are organized into clear functional groups (retrieval, search, verification, conversion), and pairs like get_indicator/get_series and verify_stat/verify_claims have explicit usage distinctions. The only minor overlap is between fetch and get_series, but their descriptions clarify when to use each.
Most tool names follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (get_indicator, verify_stat, compare_sources), with a few single-word or noun-style exceptions (fetch, search, country_snapshot). The overall convention is predictable and consistent.
12 tools is within the optimal range for a domain of this complexity, covering retrieval, search, comparison, verification, conversion, and source listing without unnecessary bloat.
The surface covers the full workflow: discover indicators (search_indicators), search data (search), fetch data (get_indicator, get_series, fetch, country_snapshot), compare sources (compare_sources), convert values (fx_convert, inflation_adjust), verify claims (verify_stat, verify_claims), and understand sources (list_sources). No critical gaps are apparent.