macro_usa_pmi

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the date range and return type (DataFrame), which is useful context, but does not disclose update frequency, coverage limitations, or whether data is seasonally adjusted.

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?

Description is compact but repeats the report name in the title and the return docstring. The URL and date range add useful context, but the duplication could be trimmed without losing information.

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 parameterless report retrieval tool, the description provides essential facts: what data, date range, source, and return type. Missing details like column names or units, but given simplicity and annotations, it is reasonably 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?

Tool has zero parameters, so description does not need to explain them. Schema coverage is 100% (empty properties), and the baseline for zero 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?

Description clearly identifies the tool as retrieving the US Markit Manufacturing PMI preliminary report, with a specific date range (20120601 to present) and source URL. It distinguishes from sibling PMI tools (ISM PMI, services PMI, China PMI) by specifying Markit, manufacturing, and preliminary.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like macro_usa_ism_pmi or macro_usa_services_pmi. The description provides data range and source but does not mention selection criteria or exclusions.

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