fomc-tracker

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses outputs and data sources (FRED CSV, static calendar) but does not mention update frequency, latency, or potential issues. Still, for a simple read-only tool with 0 parameters, it is reasonably 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with key data, no wasted words. Efficient and easy to parse.

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 no output schema and 0 parameters, the description covers the main outputs and data sources. It could mention data freshness or limitations, but it is sufficiently complete for understanding the tool's function.

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?

The tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info (none needed) but effectively describes the outputs, which is excellent for a zero-parameter tool.

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 what the tool provides: US Federal Funds Rate, next FOMC meeting date with countdown, rate trend, and full 2026 schedule. It also identifies data sources and explicitly pairs with sibling tools, distinguishing its role.

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 context by stating it pairs with treasury-yields and credit-spreads, indicating complementary use. However, it lacks explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' guidance, though the domain is clear.

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