country_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it fetches in parallel for low latency, and explains the behavior of the 'year' and 'indicator_codes' parameters clearly. It does not discuss side effects, but as a read-only operation this is acceptable.

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 a one-line summary, a single sentence about parallelism, and then a structured Args block. It is well-organized and front-loaded, though the Args block could be slightly more compact.

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 an output schema exists, description need not explain return values. It covers inputs and behavior adequately for a tool that returns a curated set of indicators. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to decide when to use it among 14 siblings.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does so excellently by explaining each parameter: 'country' accepts ISO3, name, region, or income-group; 'year' defaults to most recent; 'indicator_codes' overrides the default list. This adds critical meaning beyond the schema's type definitions.

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 'latest values for a curated set of headline indicators in one country,' which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like 'compare_countries' (multi-country comparison) and 'get_indicator_data' (likely for specific indicators).

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 mentions parallelism for low latency but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_indicator_data' or 'compare_countries'. The usage context is implied but not directly guided.

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