get_economic_calendar

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the returned content ('expected and prior values', 'by region and time'), which largely restates the output schema and says nothing about data sources, refresh cadence or rate limits.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by compact Args/Returns blocks; every line is short and relevant. The Returns block mildly duplicates the output schema, which is the only waste.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and both parameters are documented despite zero schema coverage. Complete for a simple two-parameter read tool; only the missing when-to-use routing and data-freshness context hold it below 5.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden, and it does: 'days' is explained as a look-ahead window (default 7) and 'limit' as a cap on events (default 30). That gives an agent enough to call it correctly, though units of the window (calendar vs trading days) remain unstated.

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 ('Get upcoming economic events') and enumerates the event classes (CPI, jobs, GDP, rate decisions) plus the returned value types, which cleanly separates it from calendar siblings like get_earnings_calendar, get_ipo_calendar and get_splits_calendar.

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 event list implies macro/economic-calendar use, but there is no explicit statement of when to reach for this over the other calendar tools, nor any exclusion or prerequisite. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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