imf-country-outlook

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the data source (IMF DataMapper API), that no key is required, and that updates occur in April and October. It adequately describes the output fields, though it could mention error handling for invalid inputs.

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 concise at four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by indicators, source, and use cases. No redundant or filler content.

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, the description fully explains what is returned (list of economic indicators) and provides source, update frequency, and appropriate use cases, making it complete for a data retrieval tool with simple parameters.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds marginal value by noting the default horizon of 3 years, matching the schema, but does not provide additional parameter insight beyond what the schema already offers.

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 IMF World Economic Outlook forecasts for 180+ countries, listing specific indicators. It explicitly distinguishes itself from World Bank data, a sibling tool, by noting these are IMF forward projections updated semi-annually.

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 suggests use cases like sovereign risk and EM allocation, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives beyond distinguishing from World Bank.

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