World Bank indicator metadata

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

Annotations already indicate safe, read-only, idempotent behavior. Description adds that it returns specific metadata fields, which is useful but not critical given annotations. No contradictions.

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 sentences plus an example. Extremely concise, front-loaded with purpose and output, no redundant information.

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 simple one-parameter tool with good annotations, the description covers output fields, usage, and an example. No output schema needed; the description provides sufficient return structure details.

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?

Single parameter 'code' is fully described in schema (100% coverage). Description adds an example usage ('NY.GDP.MKTP.CD'), which provides concrete but not essential semantics beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool returns metadata for a single indicator, listing fields (name, source, topics, definition/notes). Distinguishes from siblings like worldbank_search_indicators and worldbank_indicator by focusing on metadata for a given code.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use to confirm what an indicator code measures', providing a clear use case. Does not mention when not to use or name alternatives, but the sibling list implies better tools for search or data.

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