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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the mode-switching behavior: with upcoming_dates=true the return payload changes from release metadata to a release calendar, which is not evident from annotations alone.

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 tight sentences with no filler; the primary browse purpose is front-loaded, followed by the conditional mode toggle and the use case. Every clause earns its place.

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 low-complexity, all-optional-parameter catalog tool with rich annotations and a fully documented schema, this is close to sufficient. It conveys both return modes, though it does not describe what a release record contains, which an agent might want given there is no output schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so limit, release_id, and upcoming_dates are already fully documented in the schema, and the baseline is 3. The description only restates the upcoming_dates behavior and adds nothing about release_id filtering or limit defaults.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Browse FRED economic releases') and grounds it with concrete examples (Employment Situation, CPI, GDP). It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like fred_observations or fred_search, so an agent must infer the boundary from the resource noun alone.

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?

Implies usage with 'Useful for knowing when fresh data is expected,' which hints at the calendar-discovery use case, and the upcoming_dates toggle is explained. However, it never says when to pick this over fred_search, fred_series_info, or fred_observations, and gives no explicit exclusions.

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