worldbank.indicator

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions fetching time series and optional year parameters but fails to disclose pagination behavior (page/limit parameters exist in schema but are absent from description), rate limits, or error handling. The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated.

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, with two sentences that front-load the core action and provide context. Every sentence is informative and there is no redundancy or wasted words.

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 6 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the key inputs (country, indicator, year range) and scale but omits pagination details and response format. It is adequate for basic use but could be more complete given the complexity.

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 only 33% (country and indicator have descriptions). The description adds value by explaining yearFrom/yearTo as optional brackets and providing an indicator example, but it does not cover page or limit parameters. This partially compensates for the schema gaps but not fully.

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 fetches a time series of a specific World Bank indicator for a country, with an example indicator code and country format. It distinguishes itself from sibling data tools by explicitly naming the data source (World Bank Open Data) and specifying the scale (1000+ indicators, 200+ countries).

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 implies the tool is for World Bank data but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives. No exclusions or when-not-to-use scenarios are mentioned, though the context of sibling tools makes the purpose reasonably clear.

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