bcrp_describe_series

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates that the operation is lightweight ('without fetching all data points'), read-only in nature, and that it returns series names, frequency, decimal precision, and available date range. This is meaningful behavioral context, though it does not cover error behavior or rate limits.

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 three sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, the return fields are listed compactly, and the usage guidance names the sibling tool explicitly. Every sentence earns its place.

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 low-complexity tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what it does, what it returns, when to use it, and how it differs from the related fetching tool. An agent can correctly decide to call it and knows what kind of result to expect.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage of both parameters, including min/max items for series_codes and the language options. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond what the schema states, so it meets the baseline without exceeding it.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get metadata about 1–10 BCRP series without fetching all data points.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from bcrp_get_series by emphasizing the metadata-only scope and the batch limit, so an agent can tell what it is for.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use this to verify series codes exist and understand what they measure before fetching large date ranges with bcrp_get_series.' This names the alternative tool and the exact condition that should trigger this one.

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