veroq_economy_indicator

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully bears the burden. It discloses cost (2 credits), maximum observations (100), and return structure (series info, latest value, historical array). It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but it's implied; minor gap prevents a 5.

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 tightly structured with labeled sections (WHEN TO USE, RETURNS, COST, EXAMPLE, CONSTRAINTS), front-loading key information with zero waste. Every sentence adds value.

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?

The description explains return values in detail ('Series info (ID, frequency, units), latest value, and historical observations array') and includes constraints, which compensates for the lack of an output schema. The tool is simple, and the description covers all necessary context.

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 provides full descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage). The description's example adds no new semantic info beyond the schema, resulting in baseline score of 3.

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 it retrieves a specific FRED economic indicator with historical observations, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling 'veroeq_economy' which provides a summary without arguments.

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?

Explicitly provides 'WHEN TO USE' section detailing that it is for detailed history of one indicator, and directs to 'veroeq_economy' for a summary. Also includes cost and constraints, giving clear usage context.

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