get_release_dates

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

The description augments the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint) with concrete behavioral details: pagination metadata, default ordering (oldest first), sort direction, result limit, and the ability to include future dates with no data. This goes beyond the structured hints and adds meaningful context.

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 concise sentences front-load the main purpose and then enumerate supported features. Every word contributes value; no filler or redundant phrasing.

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 description covers the tool's scope, defaults, available options, and even hints at return content (pagination metadata). With an output schema present and strong annotations, the description sufficiently completes the picture for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds minor context (e.g., default sort order) but mostly restates what the schema already covers. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the description doesn't significantly enhance parameter meaning.

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: 'publication dates of ONE FRED release (its calendar)'. It also distinguishes from siblings by explicitly limiting scope to a single release, contrasting with get_releases_dates which handles multiple releases.

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 when to use this tool—when you need the calendar for one specific FRED release—but does not explicitly name alternatives or state exclusions. It lacks a direct 'use this instead of X' statement, so it falls short of a 5 but provides clear contextual guidance.

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