get_trade_data

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions that data includes value and volume, offering some insight into the return content, but does not disclose response format, potential limitations, or authentication needs. This is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that is concise and free of redundancy. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose, making it highly efficient.

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 data retrieval tool with comprehensive schema coverage and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context about what the tool does and what data it returns. It does not explain return formatting, but this is not critical given the schema handles parameter details.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage, so the description does not need to elaborate much. It mentions 'by HS code' and 'exports/imports', which roughly align with hs_code and source parameters, but adds little beyond what the schema already provides. 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 tool retrieves foreign trade data (exports/imports) by HS code for Indonesia, using a specific verb and resource. It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like get_census_data or get_press_release by focusing on trade 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 usage for Indonesian trade data queries but does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance or mention alternatives. Since the context is clear but exclusions are absent, this is an implied usage scenario rather than fully explicit.

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