Get Country Economic Data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the source (World Bank) but no further behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, caching, response format). It does not contradict annotations.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Get global development indicators from World Bank'), includes examples, and specifies the scope (200+ countries). No unnecessary words, making it highly concise and scannable for an AI agent.

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 has an output schema, description need not explain return values. However, it omits guidance on handling large result sets via pagination (per_page parameter exists). The description is functional but lacks completeness for a tool with multiple optional parameters and potential large responses.

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 parameter descriptions. The description adds value by listing example indicator types (GDP, population, inflation, trade, poverty) that correspond to possible indicator_id values, providing context beyond the schema's generic descriptions. However, it does not detail the date format or pagination behavior.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves global development indicators from World Bank, listing specific examples (GDP, population, inflation, trade, poverty) and coverage of 200+ countries. The verb 'Get' combined with resource 'economic data' accurately conveys the action, distinguishing it from sibling tools like finance.macro.indicator or world.country.search.

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 World Bank data but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., finance.macro.indicator for general macro data). No when-not-to-use guidance or comparison to siblings is provided, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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