get_macro_context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It specifies the output content (key indicators) and the 'Get' verb implies read-only behavior, but it does not mention data freshness, source, or any retrieval caveats. For a simple read-only tool, this is adequate but not deeply transparent.

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 two sentences: an immediate statement of purpose followed by a concise list of returned indicators. Every sentence adds value, and there is no fluff, repetition, or irrelevant detail.

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 takes no inputs, so invocation is unambiguous, and an output schema exists to define the exact return shape. Given the tool's simplicity, the description's indicator list plus the output schema provide enough for an agent to select and call it 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?

The input schema has zero properties, so there are no parameters for the description to clarify. The zero-parameter baseline is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on output rather than input semantics.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Get') and a distinct resource ('current macroeconomic indicators and context'), then enumerates concrete indicators. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like get_quote, get_technical_indicators, and get_company_profile, which target micro-level market or company 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 implies a use case by listing Fed funds rate, treasury yields, GDP, unemployment, and CPI, but it never explicitly states when an agent should choose this tool over siblings, nor does it name alternatives. Usage is reasonably inferred but not directly guided.

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