Search Economic Data

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds context about the breadth of FRED (800,000+ series from 100+ sources) and discloses the return format (series IDs), which is especially useful given the lack of an output schema.

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, consisting of three sentences that are front-loaded with the core action. It includes essential context (database scope, examples, return usage) without any extraneous 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?

For a simple single-parameter search tool with rich annotations, the description covers the purpose, database, and return value, forming a complete picture. It could mention pagination or result limits, but these are not critical for understanding how to use 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for the single 'query' parameter, including example terms. The description does not add any additional parameter-level details beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 that the tool searches the FRED database for economic data series, using the specific verb 'search' and resource 'FRED database'. It distinguishes from siblings like search_companies by explicitly targeting economic data and mentions returning series IDs for use with get_economic_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?

The description provides clear context by specifying the FRED database and indicating the workflow of using returned series IDs with get_economic_data. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the focus on economic data makes the intended use self-evident.

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