get_bank_rate_playbooks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds Vietnam and bank rate context but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as data freshness, prerequisites, or limitations. With annotations present, the description adds marginal value.

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 very concise, with two short sentences front-loaded with relevant information. It avoids fluff, but could include more useful details without significantly increasing length.

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 simplicity and the presence of annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details on expected output format, parameter usage hints, and when to select this tool over similar siblings. It leaves gaps for an agent to fill.

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 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, such as acceptable values for 'category' or behavior defaults. Baseline is 3, and no extra information is provided.

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 retrieves investment playbooks based on bank interest rate scenarios in Vietnam. It uses a specific verb 'get' and resource 'playbooks' with a distinct context, differentiating it from sibling tools like get_bds_playbooks or get_commodity_playbooks.

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 for bank interest rate scenarios but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any when-not-to-use conditions. The agent must infer from context, lacking direct recommendations.

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