index_yw

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the tool is known to be a safe read-only operation. The description adds the source URL and parameter choices, which provide some context, but it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as data freshness, rate limits, or how the data is fetched. Since annotations carry the safety burden, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 front-loaded with the tool name, followed by the source URL and a Python-style docstring. The URL adds source context but is not strictly necessary; however, it does not bloat the description. The structure is clear and efficient, though the mixed Chinese title and English docstring labels could be slightly cleaner.

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 one-parameter, read-only index retrieval tool, the description covers the purpose, source URL, allowed parameter values, and return type (pandas.DataFrame). It does not detail the DataFrame structure (e.g., columns or date range), but given the low complexity and the presence of helpful annotations, it is reasonably complete.

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 schema only defines `symbol` as a string with a default, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description explicitly lists the allowed values: "周价格指数", "月价格指数", "月景气指数" (weekly price index, monthly price index, monthly prosperity index). This gives the agent complete information to invoke the tool correctly, fully compensating for the sparse schema.

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 identifies the resource as the Yiwu Small Commodity Index (义乌小商品指数) and the docstring shows it returns index results as a DataFrame. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'retrieve', and it does not differentiate from the many other index tools (e.g., index_ai_cx, index_si_cx) that could be confused with it. The name and URL give a clear subject, but the action is implied rather than stated.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned. The description only provides parameter choices and return type, so the agent is left to infer when this tool is appropriate.

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