Economic Calendar

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds default date-range behavior (from today, to ~1 week out), but does not disclose other behavioral details like timezone handling, inclusivity of dates, or response size limits.

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?

Four compact sections (purpose, when-to-use, args, returns) with no fluff. Front-loaded with the core purpose, and every bullet is actionable and necessary.

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 simple read-only calendar tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter format/defaults, and return shape. It is self-sufficient and complete for this complexity level.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates. The Args section defines both parameters with YYYY-MM-DD format and explicit defaults, adding meaningful semantics beyond the bare string type in the schema.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Get the macro economic-event calendar' and enumerates concrete examples (CPI, FOMC, jobs reports). It distinguishes from the sibling get_earnings_calendar by noting 'Event risk beyond earnings'.

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?

Explicit 'Use this tool when the user asks about:' section lists three concrete query types. It implicitly signals alternative usage via 'Event risk beyond earnings,' suggesting not to use for earnings-related events.

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