Get Country Profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'latest' qualifier, but does not disclose behavior around missing data, response completeness, or any open-world caveats, so it adds only moderate value beyond the annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence that names the action, resource, and included data without wasted words. It is efficiently structured and 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 single-parameter, read-only lookup with a robust output schema and clear annotations, the description is largely sufficient. The main gap is the lack of explicit country-code format guidance, but the schema's regex pattern partially mitigates this.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description needed to explain the 'country' parameter, but it makes no mention of it. The property name and regex pattern imply an ISO-style code, yet there is no explicit statement that the value should be a two- or three-letter country code, nor any example or format guidance.

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 a specific action ('Get') and a specific resource ('country profile'), and enumerates the exact data returned: metadata plus GDP, growth, population, inflation, and unemployment. It conveys the aggregate nature of this tool versus single-indicator siblings, but it does not explicitly name any sibling to reinforce differentiation.

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 the tool: whenever a caller needs a country's metadata plus a set of current economic indicators. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when to prefer get_indicator_data, compare_countries, or find_countries instead, so the sibling selection logic is left to inference.

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