worldbank_indicator

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only data fetch but doesn't state rate limits, authentication needs, default behavior when country/date are omitted, or what happens if an indicator ID is invalid.

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?

A single clear sentence with zero waste. However, it is too terse to be fully useful, and there is no front-loaded payload of constraints or routing guidance.

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?

For a 3-param data-fetch tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves out when to use it vs worldbank_country, whether output covers time series, and formatting of indicator IDs. Schema covers params but the description does little to complete the picture.

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%, with clear docs for date ('2015:2023, default last 8 years'), country ('default US'), and indicator examples. The description adds no param details and duplicates the indicator concept, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get') and resource ('economic/development indicator data from the World Bank'), so the purpose is clear. It doesn't distinguish from the sibling worldbank_country, which likely also reaches World Bank data, leaving some ambiguity about scope.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, no alternatives named. The sibling worldbank_country is the natural counterpart for country metadata, but the description doesn't say whether to call this tool for country lookups or how to combine them.

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