index_li_cx

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

The description adds that the return is a pandas.DataFrame and includes the source URL, but no further behavioral details such as data range, update frequency, or potential quirks. Annotations already declare this as a safe read-only operation, so the added value is limited.

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, containing only a title, a source URL, and a return type declaration. Every segment serves a purpose without 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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description should explain the returned data more thoroughly. It only states 'labor input index' without detailing columns, historical range, or how it differs from similarly named sibling tools. This is insufficient for an agent to know exactly what data it will receive.

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 baseline is 4. The description's mention of return type does not relate to parameter semantics, and there is nothing to compensate for.

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 returns the 'labor input index' from Caixin Data's index report, with a source URL. It is specific about the resource, but does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling index tools like index_nei_cx.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus other index tools. The description merely states what it is, leaving the agent to infer usage entirely from the name.

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