Regional Economic Context

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

Description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: explains graceful degradation when FRED API is unavailable, requirement for FRED_API_KEY, and what outputs are included (trend analysis, narrative, structured JSON). Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent, so no contradiction.

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?

Description is well-structured with a concise opening statement followed by bullet points listing outputs and notes. It front-loads the core purpose. Slightly longer than necessary but still efficient. Could trim redundant phrasing like 'Gracefully degrades' appearing twice.

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 complexity (external API, multiple output types, graceful degradation), the description covers all critical aspects: inputs, outputs, dependencies, and failure behavior. An output schema exists to detail return values, so the description appropriately focuses on usage and behavioral nuances.

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 100% with descriptions for all 3 parameters. Description adds value by explaining that cert auto-detects state from institution record, and that repdte sets the date range for FRED data. This enriches the schema's basic parameter descriptions.

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?

Clearly states the tool's purpose: overlay macro/regional economic data on a bank's geographic context. Specifies data sources (FRED) and outputs (unemployment rates, federal funds rate, narrative). Distinct from sibling tools which focus on bank-specific financial analysis, making it clear when to use this tool.

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?

Description implies when to use: when needing macroeconomic context for a bank. Does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives, but the context of sibling tools makes the differentiation clear. Could be improved by noting that for bank-specific financials, use other tools like fdic_analyze_bank_health.

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