trade_timeseries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the basic function without detailing data source, units, aggregation method, or limitations like historical coverage or update frequency. This lack of transparency could lead to misuse.

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 concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the key action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool has 4 required parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It fails to explain the return format (e.g., a list of years and volumes), data granularity, or any assumptions about the time series. Users are left with incomplete information to assess suitability.

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 100%, but the description adds context by explaining that the tool covers 'a country pair over multiple years,' which maps to the required parameters (reporter, partner, start_year, end_year). However, it does not clarify what 'trade volume' means (e.g., exports, imports, total) or provide additional semantic detail 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 clearly states 'Get trade volume time series for a country pair over multiple years.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('trade volume time series'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like trade_balance, trade_commodity, and trade_flow by specifying the time series aspect.

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 implies usage for retrieving time series data but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as trade_balance or trade_commodity. No mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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