time_series_weekly

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 but offers none. It doesn't indicate whether this is a read-only operation, what data source it accesses, potential rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output format looks like. The vague term 'fetch' provides minimal insight into the tool's behavior.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence, 'Fetch a time series weekly', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of under-specification, but based purely on structure and brevity, it earns top marks.

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's complexity (fetching time series data), lack of annotations, 0% schema description coverage, no output schema, and numerous sibling tools, the description is completely inadequate. It fails to provide essential context about data type, usage, parameters, or behavior, making it insufficient for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 description adds no meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It doesn't explain what 'symbol' represents (e.g., stock ticker, currency pair) or what 'datatype' is for, leaving both parameters semantically undocumented. With two parameters and no schema descriptions, this is inadequate.

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 'Fetch a time series weekly' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'time_series_weekly' without adding meaningful specificity. It doesn't clarify what type of data is fetched (e.g., stock prices, economic indicators), what 'weekly' refers to (e.g., aggregation frequency, time period), or how it differs from sibling tools like 'time_series_daily' or 'time_series_weekly_adjusted'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, and fails to differentiate it from numerous sibling tools (e.g., other time series tools like 'time_series_daily' or 'time_series_weekly_adjusted'), leaving the agent with no basis for selection.

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