get_series_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get metadata' suggests a read operation, but there is no disclosure of return structure, error behavior, rate limits, or whether any side effects occur. The description is too thin to give an agent confidence about 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 short and the key purpose is front-loaded. The 'Args' formatting is slightly unnecessary given the schema already defined the parameter, but it does not waste much space. Overall it is efficient.

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 single-parameter metadata retrieval tool, this is minimally adequate. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least mention what metadata will be returned or what happens for an invalid series_id. It is complete enough for a simple call but leaves notable gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does by explaining series_id as 'The ID of the series' and giving concrete examples ('GDP', 'UNRATE'), which adds semantics beyond the bare schema field name 'Series Id'. It does not explain where to find an ID, but the examples are useful.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Get metadata for a specific data series.' The word 'metadata' helps distinguish it from sibling get_series_data, though it does not explicitly name any sibling. The focus on 'specific' series implies lookup by ID, which is close to full differentiation.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_series or get_series_data. The description implies it is for known series IDs, but it does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or when a sibling would be more appropriate.

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