get_operational_efficiency

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, any authentication requirements, or rate limits. It only names metrics, missing opportunities to inform the agent about side effects or permissions.

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 very short (one line) but cryptic. It includes Chinese characters and a dash, which may confuse an English-speaking agent. It is not front-loaded with essential information, requiring the agent to infer meaning.

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 tool with 3 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not describe the output format, how to interpret results, or any usage context. Given the complexity of financial metrics, this is insufficient.

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 has 3 parameters (num, code, currency_code) with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain any parameter semantics, such as what 'code' represents or the meaning of 'num'. The agent cannot determine how to set these parameters based on the description alone.

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 'Operational efficiency' and lists specific metrics (e.g., headcount per employee, revenue per employee), indicating the tool retrieves operational efficiency metrics. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like get_revenue_breakdown or get_financial_statements, which might also contain efficiency data.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description merely lists metrics without any context about when it is appropriate to use or what prerequisites exist.

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