get_treasury_bills

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states it's a read operation ('Get'), but does not disclose potential traits like data freshness, authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens when no results are found.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded. Every word is necessary and there is no 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?

Given no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns. It omits return structure or format, which could hinder an agent from correctly using the response. However, the tool is simple, and the parameter descriptions are adequate.

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%, and the parameter descriptions add some meaning beyond names (e.g., examples for 'type'). However, the added value is limited; the descriptions are terse and do not clarify formatting or constraints beyond what the schema provides.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'treasury bills auction results' from a specific source 'Bank Al-Maghrib'. It effectively conveys the tool's function, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_bond_quotes, but the resource name is specific enough.

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 vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where this tool is preferred over siblings such as get_interest_rates or get_bond_quotes.

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