Search FRED series

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows it's a safe, non-mutating operation. The description adds context about search modes (text or series ID) and tag filters but does not disclose pagination limits or default behaviors (e.g., default limit of 1000) beyond what the schema already shows. No contradiction with 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 sentences: the first states the purpose, the second provides a concrete, easy-to-follow example. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place, making it a model of conciseness.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is not complete for a tool with 12 parameters and 0% schema coverage. It lacks guidance on pagination (offset/limit behavior), how to use sorting/ordering, realtime date bounds, and the exact semantics of filter_variable/filter_value. The example only shows search_text and limit, leaving an agent uncertain about many valid use cases.

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 for the 12 parameters. It explains the role of search_text and mentions 'tag filters' (implying tag_names and exclude_tag_names), but it does not clarify the other 9 parameters like offset, order_by, sort_order, realtime_start/end, filter_variable/filter_value, or search_type beyond a vague 'by text or series ID'. This leaves most parameters semantically unexplained.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'FRED series', and specifies search by text or series ID with optional tag filters. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_series (which fetches a known series) and search_series_tags (which searches tags), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 that this tool is for searching series when you have a text query or series ID, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives. There is no 'when not to use' or reference to sibling tools, so the agent must infer usage context from the wording and example.

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