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

The description discloses that no derived sentiment or indicator classifications are added, which is a useful behavioral detail beyond the annotations. It also clearly states the authentication/access behavior for USD versus other currencies, which is important for callers to know.

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 concise and well-structured, with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the core purpose, adds the sibling-tool distinction, and then states access requirements in a clear final sentence.

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 the output schema exists and the parameters are straightforward, the description provides enough context about what is returned and under what conditions. The access caveat and the distinction from macro_news make the tool's role in the broader toolset clear.

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 schema already fully describes all parameters, including currency case-insensitivity and limit/offset defaults and ranges. The description does not add extra parameter-level meaning, so a baseline score is appropriate.

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 returns the public central-bank press-release archive for a currency, with a specific verb and resource. It also explicitly differentiates this tool from macro_news, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

It provides direct guidance on when to use this tool versus macro_news: use macro_news when a headline summary is useful, and this tool when original official release rows matter. It also explains access differences by currency, including the subscription_required outcome.

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