bls_employment_by_industry

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile. The description adds minimal behavioral context (e.g., that it can show growth/shrinkage), but does not disclose details like response format, data source, or historical depth beyond what the schema implies.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core function, and every word adds value. No filler or redundancy.

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 tool with only two optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context to select and invoke it. It could benefit from mentioning return values or how growth/shrinkage is derived, but the schema covers the main parameters and the readOnlyHint covers safety.

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 both start_year and end_year having descriptions. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter context, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the verb ('Get') and resource ('employment numbers broken down by major industry sector'). It also adds insight ('Shows which sectors are growing or shrinking') and is easily distinguishable from sibling BLS tools like bls_cpi_breakdown or bls_series_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?

The description implies its use for industry employment data, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus other BLS or economic data tools. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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