index_neaw_cx

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, non-destructive). The description adds useful context about returning a pandas DataFrame and the source URL, but does not disclose other behavioral specifics such as pagination, data freshness, or permission requirements.

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 compact and includes standard docstring elements (URL, :return:, :rtype:). It is front-loaded with the title and avoids redundancy, though the format is slightly non-standard for a tool 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?

For a parameterless tool, the description adequately conveys the data source, what data is returned, and the return type. The absence of an output schema makes the return-type note valuable. It does not discuss edge cases or selection criteria, but that is not critical for 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers parameter semantics (vacuously). The description correctly omits parameter details, and the 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 clearly identifies the resource (new economy industry entry average salary from Caixin Data) and the return type. It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling index tools like index_nei_cx, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'returns' or 'fetches'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only names the data source and URL, with no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling index tools.

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