macro_china_international_tourism_fx

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it returns a pandas.DataFrame, which is useful but minimal. It does not disclose data range, columns, or error behavior, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 brief, consisting of a title, a URL, and return type annotations. It is concise and front-loaded, though the structure is slightly fragmented with separate :return: and :rtype: lines.

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 tool, the description provides the data source and return type, but lacks detail on the structure or content of the returned DataFrame. Since there is no output schema, more explanation about the data (e.g., columns, time range) would enhance completeness.

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 parameter semantics are trivial. The description correctly implies no arguments are needed, and the schema confirms this. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 specific dataset: 新浪财经-中国宏观经济数据-国际旅游外汇收入构成, and includes a source URL and return type. It distinguishes from sibling tools by naming the exact resource, but lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'return'.

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 on when to use this tool versus other macro data tools. The description only states the source and return type, with no mention of use cases, alternatives, or exclusions.

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