World Bank Multi-Indicator Query

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond that, such as rate limits or error behavior. It does not contradict annotations, so baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 concise: a one-line Chinese summary followed by a structured docstring listing parameters. It is front-loaded and avoids unnecessary detail. The docstring format is slightly redundant with the schema but still 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?

Given the moderate complexity (multi-indicator, multi-country), the description covers query intent and parameter semantics well. However, it lacks information about the return format (since no output schema exists) and any limitations or pagination. It is adequate but could be more complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing realistic examples for indicators (e.g., 'GDP_GROWTH', 'CPI') and countries (e.g., 'CHN', 'USA'), and clarifying that countries use ISO3 codes. This practical guidance raises the score to 4.

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 queries multiple World Bank indicators simultaneously and enables cross-country comparison. The verb 'query' and resource 'multiple World Bank indicators' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like ext_world_bank (single indicator) and ext_world_bank_indicators (list 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?

The description implies when to use (multi-indicator, cross-country queries) via the title and summary, and provides detailed argument examples. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives like ext_world_bank for single indicators, which would improve guidance.

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