fred_series_data

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals a safe read operation. The description adds no further behavioral details (e.g., pagination, rate limits, or result format). With annotations present, the description's contribution is adequate but minimal.

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 extremely concise—two brief lines. It front-loads the purpose and immediately adds value with popular examples, making it easy to scan.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters, is a data retrieval operation, and lacks an output schema. The description does not explain what the response contains (e.g., time series with dates, values). While the schema covers parameters, the missing return shape reduces completeness for agents.

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 the input schema already documents all parameters. The description does not add semantic meaning beyond the schema (e.g., how date filters interact). Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 observations for a FRED series' with specific verb and resource. It lists popular series IDs (GDP, UNRATE, etc.), which helps agents understand the tool's domain. This distinguishes it from siblings like fred_search, fred_series_info, and fred_release_data.

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 context (popular series) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. It does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools for related tasks.

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