get_series_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Get' suggests read-only behavior and the listed metadata fields indicate what is returned, but it does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or error behavior. It is not misleading but lacks depth.

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 extremely compact: a one-sentence purpose statement followed by a minimal Args block. Every word earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded.

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's simplicity (1 parameter) and the existence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose and parameter semantics. It could be slightly more complete by noting that search_series should be used if the series ID is unknown, but overall it's adequate.

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. The Args section clearly defines 'series_id' with concrete examples ('UNRATE' or 'GDPC1'), which adds meaning far beyond the bare schema title 'Series Id'.

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 retrieves metadata for a specific FRED series, listing example metadata fields (title, units, frequency, range, notes). This specific verb+resource phrasing distinguishes it from siblings like search_series (searching) and get_observations (retrieving data points).

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 when you already know a specific series ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus search_series or get_observations, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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