货币供应量数据

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does communicate that the tool is a retrieval operation ('获取') for monthly money supply data, but it does not disclose the response shape, ordering, date range, or how the limit parameter affects results. This is a moderate transparency gap given there is no output schema.

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 filler or redundant phrasing. It front-loads the key information: the action, the data type, and the frequency.

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 simple one-optional-parameter data fetch, the core purpose is covered, and the schema documents the limit parameter. However, with no output schema and no differentiation from sibling macro tools, the description leaves the return layout and selection context incompletely specified.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the only parameter 'limit' documented as '返回数量'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it remains at the baseline for fully documented parameters.

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 states a specific verb and resource: '获取中国货币供应量(M0/M1/M2)月度数据'. This clearly identifies the data being retrieved, including series and frequency. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling macro tools such as macro_monetary or macro_growth.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many macro data siblings, and no exclusions or alternative tool references are provided. The description only restates the basic function, so the agent must infer usage from the tool name and title rather than from explicit direction.

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