IMF DataMapper Query

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by stating '完全免费，无需认证' (completely free, no authentication), which is behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradiction detected.

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 concise, with a front-loaded purpose statement and structured 'Args:' section. Every sentence is informative, and there is no redundant information. It efficiently uses both Chinese and English to cover key points.

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 absence of an output schema, the description does not explain the return format or structure of the query results. While the input parameters and behavior are well-covered, the lack of output details leaves the agent uncertain about what to expect from the response.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the description still adds significant value by providing usage examples (e.g., '["GDP_GROWTH","CPI_INFLATION"]') and a comprehensive list of common indicators. This helps the agent select valid parameter values beyond the schema's generic descriptions.

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 explicitly states it queries IMF World Economic Outlook (WEO) data and lists specific supported indicators. The verb '查询' (query) and resource 'IMF 世界经济展望 (WEO) 数据' are clear. It differentiates from siblings like ext_fred or ext_world_bank by specifying the IMF source, though not explicitly distinguishing from other IMF tools.

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 context (free, no auth, supports multiple indicators) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like ext_fred or ext_world_bank. Usage is implied for IMF data queries, but no exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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