fred_series

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals that a free FRED API key is required and can be supplied either via an environment variable or the api_key parameter. However, it does not disclose rate limits, error behavior, output shape, or whether the operation is read-only, leaving notable gaps.

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, front-loaded sentence that leads with the core action and resource, then adds the critical API key requirement. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and no property descriptions in the input schema, the one-line description is insufficient. It does not explain parameter semantics, return format, or how to interpret FRED series observations, so an agent would have to guess at several operational 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only addresses the api_key parameter (and only indirectly via 'FRED_API_KEY or api_key input'), while series_id, limit, and sort_order are left unexplained. The phrase 'macro observations' hints at the return value but not at what each parameter controls.

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 states a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('FRED macro observations'), clearly distinguishing it from the trading-focused sibling tools. It does not explicitly mention that the tool fetches observations for a given series_id, but the required parameter makes that implicit.

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 alternatives, and no exclusions or preferred scenarios are described. The only usage-related note is the API key requirement, which is a prerequisite rather than a selection criterion.

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