fred_get_series

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It correctly indicates a read operation ('Retrieve data') and lists supported transformations, but it does not disclose potential errors (e.g., invalid series ID), rate limits, or any side effects. The description is adequate but lacks depth on behavioral details.

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 extremely concise—two sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the core action and then lists key capabilities efficiently. Every word adds value.

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 tool has 11 parameters and no output schema. The description covers purpose and supported features but does not explain the return format (e.g., observations with dates and values). Given the complexity, more detail on what the response contains would be beneficial.

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%, with detailed descriptions for all 11 parameters. The description adds no specific parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, only a high-level overview. Per rules, a baseline of 3 is appropriate given the rich 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Retrieve data' and the resource 'any FRED series by its ID', directly indicating the tool's function. It also mentions supported features like transformations, frequency changes, and date ranges, which distinguishes it from siblings fred_browse and fred_search that handle browsing and searching, not data retrieval.

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 usage for retrieving data for a known series ID, but it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus its siblings. No direct 'when to use' or 'when not to use' advice is provided, leaving the agent to infer the context from the description alone.

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