worldbank_get_data

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the disclosure burden. It does state the return shape ('List of TimeSeries, one per country'), which is useful, but it does not mention rate limits, error behavior, missing-data handling, or other runtime quirks.

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 well-structured with a leading summary sentence followed by Args and Returns sections. Every line contributes useful information and there is no redundant filler.

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 straightforward data retrieval tool, the description covers the essential context: what it does, all parameters, and the return shape. It lacks explicit usage routing to siblings and deeper edge-case behavior, but it is still complete enough for an agent to call it correctly in most cases.

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: each parameter is explained with an example or format, including indicator code ('NY.GDP.MKTP.CD'), ISO3 country codes, year range format 'YYYY:YYYY', and most_recent as an optional count.

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: 'Retrieve World Bank indicator data for given countries.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like worldbank_search_indicators (search) and worldbank_get_country_ranking (ranking), and the scope is precise.

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 implies usage by mentioning 'indicator', 'country', and optional filters, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. There are no exclusion criteria or references to sibling tools.

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