Search Development Indicators

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

Annotations already declare safety (readOnly, idempotent, etc.). Description adds what is returned (ID, name, source, description, topics) and license attribution, which is additional useful behavioral context.

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 efficient sentences, front-loaded with main action, no redundancy, every word adds value.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed. Description covers purpose, examples, complementary tool, and licensing. Fully adequate for a search tool with strong annotations.

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 baseline 3. Description adds examples for keyword ('gdp', 'population') and topic (poverty, education), and implies limit by mentioning 'returns indicator ID...', providing context beyond the schema.

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?

Specific verb+resource('Search development indicators'), describes scope (16,000+), lists examples (GDP, population, etc.), and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning integration with finance.country_data for time-series data.

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?

Clear context: use to find indicators, then use indicator IDs with finance.country_data for data. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but provides a concrete alternative workflow.

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