singapore_query_unemployment

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: it discloses that source coverage comes from a bundled catalog and that metadata should be fetched for current coverage, which warns about possible staleness.

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 front-loaded with the dataset name and purpose, and the remaining sentences are mostly useful. Minor redundancies such as 'Topic: employment' and the coverage caveat add some length but do not obscure the core message.

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 the presence of an output schema and annotations covering safety, the description is largely complete: it states purpose, prerequisite inspection, supported operations, and a return-coverage caveat. The main missing piece is explicit routing guidance versus the generic query 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?

Schema coverage is 50%, and the description lists supported capabilities (exact filters, column text search, fields, sort, pagination) that map loosely to parameters. It does not add syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides, so it partially but not fully compensates for the coverage gap.

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 names a specific verb and resource: querying the Average Resident Unemployment Rate by Sex, Age, and HQA, annual, from Singapore DOS. It clearly identifies the dataset and topic, so an agent can distinguish it from generic query tools, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like singapore_query_dataset.

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?

It gives a useful prerequisite: inspect dataset d_11a640f1e61c1a680efeac8c775cdcb5 first for filter fields. However, it does not state when to use this tool versus the generic singapore_query_dataset or other alternatives, leaving usage implied rather than explicit.

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