get_category_series

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, which already establish safety. The description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: pagination metadata (total count, offset, limit) and support for ordering, sort direction, and result limit. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The main action and key features (pagination, ordering, limit) are front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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 tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main input features and hints at the response structure (pagination metadata). It lacks explicit mention of the required parameter (category_id) but that is in the schema. Overall sufficient for the complexity.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explicitly linking parameters to pagination metadata and sorting options. Although 'offset' is mentioned as part of pagination metadata (likely in response), the input parameters (limit, order_by, sort) are clearly associated.

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 'List' and clearly identifies the resource 'FRED series that belong to a category'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_category' (category details) and 'get_category_children' (subcategories), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 (to list series in a category) but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it. The sibling tools imply the scope, but direct guidance on exclusions is missing.

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