macro_china_hk_cpi

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that the return type is a pandas.DataFrame and includes the source URL, but it does not disclose details such as the date range, column structure, or whether the data is seasonally adjusted. For a simple read-only retrieval tool, this is minimal but not misleading.

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 brief and to the point, containing the resource name, a supporting URL, and return type. However, the first line is redundant with the title (already provided in annotations), and the URL occupies a line that could have been used for more relevant behavioral details. Still, it is concise and front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter macro data retrieval tool, the description covers the basic purpose and return type, but it lacks detail about the DataFrame contents (e.g., columns, periodicity, units). An agent might not know whether this provides monthly or annual CPI, or if it includes multiple series. Given the lack of an output schema, the description should provide more context to be fully 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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline score is 4. The description does not need to explain any parameters because there are none. Schema coverage is trivially 100%, and the empty schema requires no further elaboration.

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 this tool returns the Consumer Price Index for Hong Kong from Eastmoney. The specific resource (中国香港-消费者物价指数) and URL provide unambiguous scope. It also includes a return type (pandas.DataFrame), reinforcing the purpose of data retrieval.

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 alternative macro indicators or sibling tools like macro_china_hk_cpi_ratio or macro_china_cpi. No context is provided about the data frequency (monthly/yearly) or specific use cases. The description only names the resource without any selection criteria.

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