List release dates for all releases

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description is consistent with them. It adds the scoping detail 'across all releases' but does not disclose pagination behavior, default limit, or return format. This is acceptable given annotations lighten the burden, but additional context could improve transparency.

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 two concise sentences. The first states the core purpose, and the second gives a helpful example. No unnecessary words or repetition—every sentence earns its place.

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?

With 7 optional parameters and pagination-related fields, the tool is moderately complex, yet the description only mentions limit. It omits guidance on offset, ordering, realtime date parameters, and the include_no_data flag. The output schema exists but does not cover usage context for parameters, leaving the description incomplete for effective invocation.

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%, and the description only provides a limit example without explaining its semantics. The other six parameters (offset, order_by, sort_order, realtime_start, realtime_end, include_release_dates_with_no_data) remain unexplained in both description and schema, with only names and types available. This fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('release dates') and scope ('across all FRED releases'), which effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_release_dates that target a single release. The example further reinforces the purpose.

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 phrase 'across all FRED releases' clearly indicates the tool is for obtaining release dates globally, implying it is not for a single release. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion conditions (e.g., when to use get_release_dates instead), leaving the guidance slightly implicit.

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