Current BoE base rate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly states what data is returned, which is helpful, but it does not explicitly mention that this is a read-only operation or disclose any other behavioral traits such as rate limits or required permissions. The word 'Get' implies non-mutating behavior, but this is not overtly stated.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and lists the outputs. Every word contributes meaning, with no filler or redundant information.

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 the low complexity (zero parameters), the presence of an output schema, and the description's clear enumeration of the returned fields, the description is complete. It provides sufficient context for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without additional details.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when there are no parameters, as the schema and description together fully cover the input requirements.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current Bank of England base rate') and details the exact information returned (rate, effective date, months held). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_rate_history and get_rate_at by emphasizing 'current'.

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 for when to use the tool: when the current base rate is needed. While it does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, the 'current' qualifier implicitly differentiates it from historical or date-specific tools, making the usage scope obvious.

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