list_releases

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It thoroughly explains the behavior of status filtering, query filtering, and default sort. It describes each return field (uri, title, summary, release_date, status) and notes that provisional dates may move and get_release shows finalization. No contradictions.

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 and concise, front-loading purpose and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value. Minor suggestion: could be slightly more compact, but it is already efficient and covers all necessary details.

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 the tool has 5 optional parameters, no enums in schema, and an output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, parameter behavior, return values, and important caveats (provisional dates may move). The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return format, but the description still provides useful 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must fully compensate. It explains each parameter: `status` with valid values ('upcoming', 'published', 'cancelled'), `query` for title/summary filtering, `sort` with allowed overrides, and implicit pagination via `limit` and `offset`. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 browses the ONS release calendar, the authoritative schedule of statistical publications. It explicitly distinguishes from using the `next_release` field on get_timeseries/get_dataset, which is a key differentiator from sibling tools. The verb 'browse' and resource 'release calendar' are specific and 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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: 'USE THIS to answer "when is the next X released"'. It provides a clear alternative not to use (the `next_release` field) and explains why it might be wrong. It also explains context-dependent default sorting behavior based on status.

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