macro_china_construction_price_index

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 safe read-only nature is established. The description adds the source URL and return type (pandas.DataFrame), which is useful context, but it does not disclose data update frequency, date range, or any quirks. Given the annotation coverage, 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 very compact: three lines containing the title, a source URL, and return type. It is appropriately concise for a no-parameter retrieval tool, with no wasted words. It reads like a stub rather than a polished description, but the brevity is suitable for the tool's simplicity.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description gives the essential 'what' (construction materials price index) and 'where' (East Money URL), but it does not describe the returned DataFrame columns (e.g., date, value). Since there is no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining return values, and it falls short of being fully self-contained.

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 schema coverage is 100% (trivially). There is nothing for the description to explain regarding parameter meaning, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description correctly does not attempt to add parameter details.

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 names the resource as '建材价格指数' (construction materials price index) and indicates a pandas DataFrame return type, which clearly identifies what the tool provides. It avoids being a pure tautology by adding the data source URL and the return type, but it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'retrieve' and does not explicitly distinguish itself from the closely named sibling macro_china_construction_index.

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 the many other macro_china_* index tools (e.g., macro_china_construction_index, macro_china_commodity_price_index). There is no mention of alternatives, prerequisites, or suitable scenarios, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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