macro_china_nbs_nation

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true), so the description only needs to add behavioral context. It adds the source URL and return type (pandas.DataFrame), but does not disclose potential failure modes, rate limits, or how the path interacts with the NBS website.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line title, the source URL, a standard docstring-style parameter list, and the return type. Every line earns its place and there is no redundant wording.

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?

This generic tool has no output schema and only sparse annotations, so the description must explain how to use it. It provides the source URL and parameter basics, but does not explain how to discover valid path values, what the returned DataFrame columns are, or how to map a user's data needs to a kind/path combination. This leaves a critical gap for an AI agent.

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 schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It provides a Chinese label for each parameter (kind, path, period) and gives concrete examples for period ('LAST10', '2016-2023', '2016-'). However, path remains vague as '数据路径' without explaining where valid paths come from or how to construct them.

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 identifies this as the National Bureau of Statistics national data general interface and states it returns a pandas DataFrame of statistical data. It is clearly a generic data retrieval tool, but it lacks an explicit action verb like 'retrieve' or 'query', and while it distinguishes itself from specific macro_china_* siblings by being a '通用接口', it does not state exactly what data it returns beyond '统计数据'.

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 generic tool versus the many specific macro_china_* functions (e.g., macro_china_cpi, macro_china_pmi). It does not mention alternatives, exclusions, or conditions that favor this tool.

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