Get series metadata

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), description adds behavioral context: notes returned verbatim with methodology caveats and copyright terms flagged via 'copyrighted'. No contradictions. Could expand on response format but covered by output schema.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences plus parameter note. First sentence sets overall purpose; second clarifies the sole parameter. No wasted words, front-loaded.

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 simple tool (one parameter, has output schema, annotations present), description covers purpose, parameter, and behavioral nuance. Complete for agent to use correctly.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description compensates by explaining 'series_id: a FRED series ID (e.g. 'GDPC1')', adding format and example. This provides meaning beyond schema's type and required flag.

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?

Description clearly states 'Full metadata for one series: units, frequency, range, and notes.' It specifies the verb (get) and resource (series metadata). Differentiates from siblings like search_series (multiple series) and get_observations (data points).

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?

Description implies usage for obtaining metadata of a known series with example 'GDPC1'. While not explicit about when not to use, the context from sibling tool names (e.g., search_series, get_observations) provides clear alternatives. No explicit exclusions or alternative names mentioned.

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