macro_snapshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses determinism, data source tiers, the reason for the EU27_2020 unemployment default, and the critical edge case: the regime is 'unknown' when either HICP or the deposit rate is missing, and it is 'never guessed'. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond a simple summary.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose ('Deterministic macro regime read'), followed by necessary data-source details and a clear statement of the unknown condition. Every sentence contributes value with no repetition or filler.

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?

The description thoroughly explains the regime logic and data inputs, but with no output schema available, it leaves the return structure unspecified. An agent cannot tell whether the tool returns just the regime label or also the underlying HICP, unemployment, and deposit rate values. This gap matters for a data-returning tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a small amount of extra context, such as why unemployment_geo defaults to EU27_2020 and that geo pertains to HICP, but it doesn't introduce new parameter format or syntax guidance beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Deterministic macro regime read' followed by the exact data inputs (HICP, unemployment, ECB deposit facility rate) and the output classification (restrictive/neutral/accommodative/unknown). This clearly differentiates it from the sibling tools, none of which overlap with macro regime determination.

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 implies when to use the tool: whenever a macro regime read based on HICP, unemployment, and the deposit rate is needed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools for other macro queries. Usage context is inferable but not explicitly framed.

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