fred_series_data

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as default sort order, limit handling, frequency conversion behavior, or the shape of returned observations. The popular series examples are illustrative, not behavioral.

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 two short sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded and the examples immediately following. Every word earns its place; there is no redundant or filler content.

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 simple read-only data retrieval tool with a fully described schema and a readOnly annotation, this description is adequate. It could clarify the return format of observations and how to find series IDs via fred_search, but the tool name and examples provide enough context for basic 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 input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all six parameters, satisfying the baseline of 3. The description adds value by listing concrete popular series IDs like GDP, UNRATE, and CPIAUCSL, which enriches the otherwise generic 'Series ID' schema description.

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 the specific verb-object pair 'Get observations for a FRED series,' clearly identifying the tool as a data retrieval operation for time-series observations. This distinguishes it from sibling FRED tools like fred_series_info (metadata) and fred_search (finding series).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as fred_series_info or fred_release_data. The popular series examples imply common usage, but the description does not state exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tool recommendations.

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