macro_uk_core_cpi_yearly

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the source URL and return type, with no additional behavioral context such as data update frequency or page limitations.

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 concise—a title, URL, and return type—with no fluff. However, it is terse and lacks any explanatory sentence, but for a simple tool this is acceptable.

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 simple no-param data retrieval, the description gives the source, return type, and indicator name. It doesn't specify the historical depth, units, or frequency, but given the annotations and minimal complexity, it's minimally viable.

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 and the schema is vacuous. Since the description doesn't need to explain parameter usage, the baseline 4 applies. The description's mention of pandas.DataFrame return type adds slight context.

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 names the exact data product (UK core CPI yearly) and states the return type, making the purpose clear. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'fetch', and it essentially repeats the tool name. It does distinguish from siblings like macro_uk_cpi_yearly by specifying 'core'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., macro_uk_core_cpi_monthly or other UK macro indicators). The description provides no usage context, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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