Get a FRED release

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'metadata' scope and an example, but does not elaborate on realtime parameter behavior or error handling. 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary verb and resource, plus a concrete example. No wasted words; highly scannable and efficient.

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 tool is simple and has an output schema, so return values need not be detailed. However, the two optional realtime parameters are not described at all, which reduces completeness in the context of FRED's realtime data model. The core purpose is adequately covered.

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 release_id via the example but provides no semantics for realtime_start and realtime_end, leaving two parameters completely unexplained. This is a significant gap for a tool with three parameters.

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 action ('Get metadata'), the resource ('a FRED release'), and the identifier ('by release ID'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_release_dates or get_release_series. The concrete example reinforces the purpose and usage pattern.

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 the tool is for when you need metadata for a specific release by ID. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the context is fairly clear given the sibling list.

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