macro_china_hk_market_info

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. The description adds useful context about the data range and return type (pandas DataFrame with current values in percent) but does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as update frequency or pagination.

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 relatively short but includes raw URLs and docstring-style return information, making it slightly cluttered. It front-loads the report name, but the structure is not as clean as it could be. Still, every sentence adds some value.

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 no-parameter, read-only tool, the description covers the key aspects: what data is returned, the period, the return structure, and source links. It lacks details on update frequency or caveats, but given the simplicity, it is sufficiently 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 schema is empty and fully covered. The description's mention of the data range is informational, not a parameter. The return type and value are described, which compensates for the absence of parameters.

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 tool as providing the Hong Kong interbank lending report (香港同业拆借报告) with a specific data range (20170320 to present), and explicitly states the return value is the current value in percent. This distinguishes it from sibling macro tools, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'query'.

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 states the data source and range, with no mention of use cases, exclusions, or sibling tools.

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