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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld, so safety is covered. The description adds pricing ($0.002/call) and the provenance of earnings dates ('seen in the feed'), which are real behavioral facts not in structured data. It stops short of output shape or rate-limit behavior.

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?

Three dense sentences with no filler: scope, use cases and price, then routing to the sibling. The most important routing constraint is front-loaded alongside the content list.

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 read-only, low-risk lookup with no output schema, the description conveys what the result contains (dated events with the assets they usually move), the cost, and where to go for a related need. Nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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 all three parameters (days, types, universe) are already documented. The description restates the type categories and the earnings-scoping intent of universe, adding marginal clarity but nothing the schema lacks. Baseline 3 applies.

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 (upcoming scheduled catalysts) and enumerates the covered categories: US macro prints, FOMC, Treasury auctions, and earnings dates. It also explicitly carves out the sibling treasury_auctions, so an agent can distinguish it without inspecting the schema.

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?

Gives concrete use cases ('avoid holding through a print', 'schedule polling') and an explicit alternative with its condition: 'for Treasury auction details use treasury_auctions.' Both when-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are covered.

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