Fed Speech MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but lacks critical behavioral details. It mentions that scanning index pages is 'slower but more thorough', which is useful, but doesn't disclose potential side effects (e.g., network calls, rate limits), authentication needs, or what 'fetch new' entails (e.g., updates a database). This leaves significant gaps for a tool that interacts with external sources.

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 highly concise with two sentences that directly address the tool's function and optional behavior. Every word contributes meaning without redundancy, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that fetches from external sources. It doesn't explain what 'fetch new' means operationally (e.g., stores data, returns results), potential errors, or how results are handled, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents both parameters. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'RSS feeds and optionally index pages', which loosely relates to parameters but doesn't provide additional syntax or format details beyond what the schema already specifies.

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 ('Fetch new speeches') and resource ('from the Federal Reserve website'), specifying it checks RSS feeds and optionally index pages. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_latest_speeches' by focusing on fetching new content rather than retrieving existing data, though it could be more explicit about this distinction.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_latest_speeches' or 'search_speeches'. It mentions optional index page scanning but doesn't explain scenarios where this is preferable, leaving usage context unclear.

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