list_rba_tablesDeprecated compatibility alias. Prefer list_catalogue(source="rba").
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | No | Optional RBA catalogue category filter. | |
| include_discontinued | No | Whether to include discontinued RBA catalogue entries. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes | Curated RBA table catalogue entries. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already state readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the important behavioral facts that the tool is deprecated and a compatibility alias, which are not present in the annotations. It does not add details about return formats or parameter behavior, but the existing annotation coverage is strong, making this additional context valuable.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately communicates deprecation and the preferred replacement. Every word earns its place, with no redundant filler.
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 comprehensive annotations and an output schema, the description only needs to signal deprecation and provide the migration path, which it does succinctly. The alias relationship means the tool's behavior is fully defined by list_catalogue, so the context is complete for a deprecated 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 provides descriptions for 100% of parameters (category and include_discontinued), so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no new parameter-level details; the alias note only hints that the parameters correspond to list_catalogue, but this is not explicit. Therefore, it does not enhance semantic understanding beyond the schema.
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 explicitly labels the tool as a 'Deprecated compatibility alias' for list_catalogue with source='rba', which clearly indicates it lists RBA tables. The title 'List RBA Tables' reinforces the resource and scope. This also distinguishes it from siblings by naming the preferred alternative.
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 directly instructs to 'Prefer list_catalogue(source="rba")', which is explicit guidance on which tool to use instead. This is a clear when-to-use/alternative directive, leaving no ambiguity about optimal usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have clear source or function boundaries (ABS, RBA, APRA, derived series, curated concepts, discovery). However, get_derived_series and get_economic_series both retrieve time-series data and could be confused; list_catalogue and search_datasets also overlap in discovery. The descriptions help, but these pairs require careful reading.
All tools follow a consistent lowercase verb_noun pattern with underscores (describe_, get_, list_, search_). Verbs are used predictably: get for retrieval, list for enumeration, search for discovery. No mixed conventions or camelCase.
14 tools is on the higher end but appropriate for a multi-source economic data API covering ABS, RBA, and APRA. The inclusion of a deprecated alias (list_rba_tables) adds slight redundancy, but the overall count is justified by distinct operations.
The surface covers discovery (search_datasets, list_catalogue), metadata (describe_dataset, structure), retrieval (source-specific and curated), and convenience wrappers (latest/top observations). Minor gaps include lack of a unified structure tool for RBA/APRA and no bulk download option, but core read-only workflows are well covered.