bea_international_investment

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description isn't required to state safety. It adds value by explaining what type of data is returned (stocks vs. changes from transactions/prices/rates), but it does not disclose behaviors like response format, pagination, or rate limits.

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 well-structured with a concise opening sentence followed by organized lists for TypeOfInvestment and Component. All content is useful, though it could be slightly tightened by referencing a dataset list for full type options.

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 read-only data retrieval tool with well-documented parameters and annotations, the description provides sufficient context: it explains the tool's purpose, key parameter values, and default behavior. It doesn't describe return format, but the output schema is absent and the description's mention of what data is shown partially compensates.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful examples and definitions for TypeOfInvestment and Component, clarifying semantics beyond the schema's basic descriptions. It even provides default values and concrete examples like 'FinAssetsExclFinDeriv' and 'ChgPosTrans'.

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 U.S. international investment position (IIP) data' and explains what the data represents ('end-of-period accumulated stocks of U.S. financial assets and liabilities'). This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling BEA tools like GDP or international transactions.

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 clear context for when to use this tool (to retrieve IIP data), and the examples of TypeOfInvestment and Component values implicitly guide use. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternative tools for related data.

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