index_cci_cx

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the source URL (https://yun.ccxe.com.cn/indices/nei) and the return type (pandas.DataFrame), which is some useful context. However, it does not disclose other behavioral aspects like data freshness, 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 very short but is under-specified rather than concise. It is essentially a title, a URL, and a return line with no structured explanation or front-loaded purpose. The content feels incomplete and does not earn its place as a useful description.

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?

With zero parameters and no output schema, the description is the only source of semantics. It merely states the returns a '大宗商品指数' with a URL, but fails to specify what this index covers, its frequency, units, or how it differs from sibling index tools. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's capabilities.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the empty schema fully documents the absence of inputs. The description adds the return type and the fact that it returns a commodity index, which provides a bit of semantic context. With 0 params, a baseline of 4 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 mainly restates the title (财新数据-指数报告-大宗商品指数) and adds a return line (':return: 大宗商品指数'). It conveys that the tool returns a commodity index, but without a clear verb or explicit action, the purpose remains vague. It does not distinguish this tool from many sibling index_* 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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description lacks any context, scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the agent without information on how to select this tool among the many similar index_* functions.

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