get_macroeconomic_research

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

No annotations provided, so the description must handle behavioral disclosure. It mentions the return format (Markdown table), which adds some transparency, but does not discuss side effects, authorization, or error behavior.

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 compact with clear sections (main, Args, Returns, Examples). No extraneous information, though it repeats parameter names from the schema.

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 an output schema present, the description explains the return format (Markdown table). For a simple two-parameter tool, it covers the basics but lacks details on date format and error handling.

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 has no descriptions (0% schema description coverage), so the description's 'Args' section adds basic meaning by labeling parameters as 'begin_time' and 'end_time' with short descriptions. However, it does not specify expected date format or constraints.

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 it retrieves macroeconomic research data (verb+resource). However, it does not differentiate from many sibling tools that also 'get' data, so it lacks sibling 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 a recommendation to use the latest dates ('推荐填入最新的日期以紧跟时事'), but no explicit context on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions.

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