bea_input_output

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds limited behavioral context, such as the specific tables involved, but does not discuss output format, pagination, or other traits. Given the annotation coverage, the description provides adequate but not exceptional transparency.

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 two sentences, with the first sentence stating the core purpose and the second providing actionable guidance. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words.

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 tool has no output schema, so the description's omission of return value structure is a gap. It mentions three table types but not what fields or format to expect. For a simple retrieval tool, this is adequate but not fully 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with both parameters described, including a reference to bea_dataset_info for table_id. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the tool retrieves Input-Output statistics for Make, Use, and Requirements tables, and explains it shows interrelationships between U.S. producers and users. This provides a specific verb and resource, and the mention of sibling tool bea_dataset_info helps distinguish its purpose.

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 explicitly directs the agent to use bea_dataset_info to discover available table IDs, providing clear context on how to obtain required parameters. However, it does not explicitly exclude other BEA tools or state when not to use this tool, leaving room for ambiguity.

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