data_availability

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

The description is consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint=true), indicating a read-only summary operation. However, it adds no behavioral details beyond what the annotations already convey, such as data freshness or pagination 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?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the key verb and resource. It is appropriately brief but could benefit from slight elaboration on parameter usage.

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, return values need not be described. However, with 7 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete for guiding parameter selection. Annotations partially compensate, but parameter semantics are lacking.

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 0%, leaving 7 parameters completely undocumented. The description mentions 'indicators' but does not elaborate on the meaning or usage of the fields like 'countries', 'region', 'year_start', etc. This is insufficient for an agent to correctly fill parameters.

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's purpose with a specific verb 'summarize' and resource 'availability for indicators', and the context 'before building a research panel' distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'build_research_panel' and 'get_indicator_metadata'.

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 provides clear timing guidance ('before building a research panel'), but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives among the 34 sibling tools.

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