本日・今週の経済イベント

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

The description discloses that data is manually curated by the operator and covers only half a year. This is useful beyond the schema, revealing limitations in scope and potential staleness. With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden and does so adequately.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and data source. It is well-suited for quick scanning, though could be slightly improved by splitting into two sentences for clarity.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should ideally explain the return format (e.g., fields like date, event name, importance). It only says 'returns major economic events', leaving ambiguity about the structure. For a simple list tool with good parameter coverage, this is acceptable but not fully complete.

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 coverage is 100%; both parameters have enum descriptions and defaults in the schema. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score 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?

The description clearly states that the tool returns major economic events for today or this week, listing specific examples (FOMC, BOJ, US employment statistics, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_quote or calculate_compound_interest which serve different purposes.

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 usage for retrieving economic events but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No direct comparison or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. However, sibling tools have distinct names and functions, so ambiguity is low.

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