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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It identifies the data source and supported indicators, but does not disclose update frequency, data freshness, error handling for invalid codes, or any access limitations. The schema provides defaults and example values, but behavioral traits beyond source are missing.

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 efficient sentences front-load the purpose and content. Every sentence adds value without extraneous detail, achieving high density of useful information for an agent.

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?

Without output schema or annotations, the description should clarify the return format or data structure. It only states 'Get global GDP...' without describing the response shape. Combined with missing usage differentiation, it leaves the agent needing additional inference.

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 the schema already documents each parameter's meaning, defaults, and examples. The description adds minimal value beyond listing supported indicators in prose, which is redundant with the schema. Baseline 3 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 retrieves global GDP and macroeconomic indicators from the IMF World Economic Outlook, listing specific indicators (GDP growth, inflation, government debt, current account, GDP per capita) and major economies. This provides a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings by source.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus its siblings (get_oecd_indicators, get_world_bank_data). The description does not mention circumstances where this tool is preferred or where others might be better, leaving the agent without decision support.

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