world_bank_indicator

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It helpfully discloses that the source is free and requires no API key, but it omits rate limits, whether requests are paginated (even though perPage exists), default date range, and what the response shape looks like for a time series.

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 short clauses with no filler, and the key identifying example is front-loaded. It is appropriately sized for a lookup tool, though it is arguably too sparse to be a model of efficiency.

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 4-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin: it never explains date-range syntax or defaults, perPage behavior, or what the returned time series looks like. It is enough to start a call but not to call it reliably.

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 only 25% — only 'date' is documented in the schema — but the description supplies concrete examples for the two required parameters (country HK, indicator NY.GDP.MKTP.CD) that the schema itself does not describe. This partially compensates for the gap, though perPage remains undocumented in both places.

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 names the specific resource (World Bank development indicator time series) and identifies the data provider and indicator codes, so an agent can distinguish it from fred_series or hkma. It does not name an explicit retrieval verb, but the resource and the parameter examples make the action obvious.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no routing to or away from sibling economic-data tools such as fred_series. The only usage-adjacent detail is 'free, no key', which describes cost/auth but not when this tool should be chosen.

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