economic_calendar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that actuals are included only 'where published,' implying missing data, and documents date constraints and country filter semantics. It does not address rate limits or error behavior, but these are not critical for a read-only calendar lookup.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and output contents. Parenthetical constraints add value without bloating the text.

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 description covers the main purpose, date defaults, country filtering, and returned fields, but omits the limit parameter and does not explain result volume or pagination. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, this leaves a meaningful gap for an agent deciding how to call the tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains start, end, and country meaningfully, but entirely omits the 'limit' parameter, leaving one of four parameters undocumented in prose. This is partial but incomplete compensation.

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 returns scheduled economic releases in a date range, with a specific list of fields (time, event, expected impact, actual vs estimate/previous). It distinguishes itself from sibling calendar tools like earnings_calendar and corporate_calendar by explicitly focusing on economic releases.

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 gives practical usage context: default date range, 90-day maximum, ISO date format, and country filter behavior including the empty-string meaning. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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