economic-calendar

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions data sources (BLS live calendar, Fed/BEA/Census static 2026 schedule) and that it includes exact dates and times, implying it is a read-only lookup. However, it does not explicitly state whether it requires authentication, rate limits, or any side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and is adequate but not fully transparent.

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 two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence immediately states the core function, and the second adds important usage context. Every word earns its place. It is appropriately sized for the information conveyed.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (listing upcoming events) and the absence of an output schema, the description adequately explains what to expect: exact dates, times (ET), and market-impact priority for 20+ releases. It also notes the data sources. The description is complete for an agent to understand the tool's capabilities.

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%, so each parameter has a description. The tool description adds value by listing example high-priority releases and mentioning market-impact priority, reinforcing the priority_filter parameter. It also notes 'exact dates, times (ET)' which is not in the schema. This goes beyond the schema definitions.

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 tool provides an 'upcoming US macro data release schedule' and lists specific releases (CPI, NFP, FOMC, etc.), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'macro-brief' or 'macro-indicators' that focus on current conditions or historical data. The verb 'schedule' and resource 'macro data releases' are specific.

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 says 'Essential for agents timing trades or building macro-regime signals,' which suggests when to use. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to alternatives like 'fomc-tracker' for specific events. The guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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