get_employment_by_sector

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the return format is employment ratio percentages for three sectors and that a message is returned if no data exists. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond what the schema provides, though it does not mention permissions or error specifics, which are less critical for a read-only query tool.

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, structured with clearly labeled Args and Returns sections, and contains no wasted words. Every sentence adds useful information, and the use of bullet-style formatting enhances readability.

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 two-parameter read tool with no annotations, the description is complete: it covers purpose, parameter constraints, return format, and the missing-data case. The sibling tool names and context signals fill in the remaining guidance, making the description sufficient for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description compensates fully. It defines country as an ISO 2- or 3-letter code with examples, and year as a four-digit number >=1960. These constraints are not present in the schema, making the parameter documentation highly valuable.

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 it retrieves employment data by sector for a specific country and year, and explicitly lists the three sectors (Services, Agriculture, Industry). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on a single sector, fulfilling the 'specific verb+resource' test.

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 that this tool returns all three sectors at once, contrasting with the sibling tools that likely return data for a single sector. However, it does not explicitly say 'use this when you need all sectors' or name the alternatives, so the guidance is clear but not fully explicit.

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