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

Beyond the readOnlyHint=true annotation, the description adds rich behavioral context: it defines the importance tiers (High/Medium/Low) with specific examples, explains why FOMC meetings are excluded, and notes the default date range (next 30 days). These details help the agent understand the tool's limits and output semantics without needing to invoke it.

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 dense single paragraph but logically structured: it starts with the main purpose, then defines tiers, mentions exclusions, defaults, and usage tips. Every sentence adds value, but the density makes it slightly less scannable than bulleted sections; still, it is concise and well-organized.

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?

Given there is no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It covers data coverage, tier filtering, exclusions, defaults, and related tools, which is sufficient for correct invocation. It doesn't describe the exact return format (e.g., array of objects with fields), but the calendar concept is straightforward enough that this is a minor gap.

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 100% for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. However, the description adds meaningful semantics: it defines the minImportance tier values (low/medium/high) and explains the default date behavior ('Defaults to the next 30 days'), clarifying startDate/endDate usage. It doesn't add much for maxResults beyond the schema's 'chronological' note.

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 opens with 'Get the economic release calendar — scheduled (upcoming) and recent publication dates of US macro data releases', which clearly states the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying US macro data and explicitly excluding FOMC meetings, setting it apart from GetMarketCalendar and GetEconomicIndicator.

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 explicit alternatives: 'FOMC meetings are NOT included ... use the Federal Reserve's published meeting calendar for those' and 'use GetEconomicIndicator to fetch a series' data after it prints.' It also gives usage advice with 'Use minImportance=high to see only the market movers' and states defaults, making when-to-use clear.

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