List Indicators

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint, covering the safety and idempotency profile. The description adds useful context about the content returned (indicators with descriptions from two named sources) but does not disclose pagination, result size, or other operational behavior. With annotations carrying the main behavioral burden, this is adequate.

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?

Two short sentences with no wasted words. The primary function is front-loaded, and the usage instruction follows naturally without redundancy.

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 parameterless discovery tool with rich annotations and an output schema already defining return values, the description needs only to state what is listed and why. It does exactly that, leaving no essential gap for an agent to call it correctly.

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 tool takes no parameters, and the schema is empty. Per the rubric, zero parameters sets a baseline of 4; the description appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose rather than describing nonexistent inputs.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: lists the indicators supported by the server, including their descriptions and data sources (World Bank + US BLS). The purpose as a discovery tool is clear and distinguishes it from siblings like country_indicator or compare_countries, which query data rather than enumerate available indicators.

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?

Provides clear contextual guidance with 'Call this to discover what you can query,' making its role as a first-step discovery tool explicit. It does not name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of the highest level of guidance.

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