bls_cpi_breakdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds no further behavioral traits beyond purpose, such as pagination, date constraints, or data limits. It does not contradict annotations but adds minimal value.

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 (24 words), directly stating the purpose and output. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information, earning its place.

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 read-only tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the purpose and what the output reveals (components driving inflation). It could optionally mention that data is returned for the specified years, but the current level is mostly 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 descriptions for both parameters (start_year, end_year). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, but given high coverage, a baseline 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 a breakdown of the Consumer Price Index by components such as food, shelter, energy, etc., and indicates it shows which categories are driving inflation. This specific verb-resource combination distinguishes it from sibling BLS tools like bls_employment_by_industry or bls_series_data.

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 the tool should be used when a component-level breakdown of CPI is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., bls_series_data for specific series). No when-not-to-use or exclusions are provided.

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