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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool returns the latest value (not historical), but says nothing about matching rules, return format, rate limits, or the meaning of the 'PRO' tag. The access_token parameter hints at authentication, but the description does not explain that requirement.

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 very short and front-loaded, but 'PRO.' is unexplained jargon and the phrasing is fragmentary. It is concise without being fully structured, leaving the agent to infer what 'PRO' and substring matching imply.

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 tool with no output schema, no annotations, and two parameters, the description is too thin. It does not explain authentication requirements, what the returned value looks like, or how substring matching handles multiple columns.

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 50%: access_token is documented in the schema, while name is not. The description usefully clarifies that name is a substring match and gives an example, which adds meaning beyond the bare string schema, but it omits case sensitivity and matching behavior.

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 states a specific retrieval action: the latest value for a column name substring, with an example ('Cash Rate Target'). It is clear enough to distinguish from a specific fixed-rate tool, though the sibling tools cash_rate and recent are not named.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus cash_rate or recent. The substring hint implies a flexible lookup, but the description never states exclusions, alternatives, or the conditions that select one sibling over another.

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