get_hf_variables_dictionaryThe exact definitions/formulas of HF Data Library's 25 pre-computed academic variables (realized volatility family, spreads, jumps, liquidity, data-quality). Verbatim from the published dictionary. Free.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds context about the content (verbatim dictionary definitions) but no additional behavioral details beyond that.
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?
Single sentence, no wasted words. Efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and content.
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?
For a no-parameter tool, the description is sufficient: it specifies what is returned (definitions/formulas) and that it's free. Could be slightly more complete by noting it's static and read-only.
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?
No parameters in schema (0 params) so baseline is 4. Description doesn't need to add parameter meaning.
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 tool provides exact definitions/formulas of 25 pre-computed academic variables, listing specific families. It is well-differentiated from sibling tools like get_hf_download_link or search_econ_series.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions it's 'Free' but lacks context for selection.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource/action: auth status, freshness, econ series, metadata, family status, HF/IP download links, dictionaries, source listings, and search. No overlapping functionality.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: get_* for retrieving specific items, list_* for enumerations, search_* for queries. Naming is uniform and predictable.
11 tools is well-scoped for a data library server covering multiple domains (econ, HF, IP) with retrieval, metadata, listings, and status checks. No redundancy or excessive granularity.
The toolset covers the full lifecycle for a read-only data service: status/auth, search, retrieval (via download links), metadata, variable dictionaries, and source listings. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose.