bea_fixed_assets

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, and the description uses 'Get', matching. The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying temporal constraints ('Annual data only, updated once per year') and the types of data covered (net stock, depreciation, investment). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three sentences: first states purpose, second covers scope and frequency, third provides examples and cross-reference. Front-loaded with key info, no wasted words. Efficiently structured.

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?

Tool has 2 optional params, no output schema. Description explains table types and update frequency, which is sufficient for a data retrieval tool. Lacks details on output format, but not required given simplicity. Good for the complexity level.

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 meaning by listing common table names, noting default values for parameters (e.g., year default 'LAST5'), and referencing bea_dataset_info for more options. This exceeds mere schema repetition.

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 'Get Fixed Assets data — net stock, depreciation, and investment tables.' It identifies the specific resource (Fixed Assets) and the action (Get), and lists example tables (FAAt101, etc.) to distinguish from sibling BEA tools like bea_dataset_info.

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 provides clear context: 'Annual data only, updated once per year (late August – early October).' It also instructs to 'Use bea_dataset_info to discover all table names.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, only implying alternative via bea_dataset_info.

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