macro_china_energy_index

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description does not need to repeat those. However, the description adds minimal context: a source URL and return type. It fails to disclose anything about the data content, periodicity, or potential quirks. The description is too sparse to be genuinely transparent.

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 and not verbose, which is positive. However, it is under-specified to the point of being a stub. It front-loads the title and a URL, but the content is too thin to be considered well-structured.

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 output schema, the description should clarify what the returned DataFrame contains. It only says 'energy index' without specifying columns, time range, or meaning. The URL is a hint but not an explanation. The overall context is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's output.

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 for this dimension is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it already specifies the return type as pandas.DataFrame, offering slight value beyond the 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 is essentially a tautology: '能源指数' (energy index) matches the tool name and provides no verb or action. It gives a source URL and return type, but does not clearly state what the tool does with the data, such as retrieving or listing energy index data.

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 compared to alternatives. It does not mention any similar tools, prerequisites, or specific scenarios. The lack of any usage context leaves the agent without direction.

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