Aktuelle Arbeitslosigkeit Schweiz

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by specifying the data source (SECO AMSTAT via opendata.swiss) and the scope of data (latest, year-over-year, cantonal), which enriches the agent's understanding beyond the annotations alone.

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?

Two sentences: the first announces the purpose, the second details the data content and source. No wasted words, and critical information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the parameter count, full schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and returns. The scope and data source are clear, and sibling tools handle other unemployment facets, leaving no gaps.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining how the 'canton' parameter affects the output (national vs. cantonal) and describing the content (rates, comparisons). This goes beyond the schema's brief descriptions.

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 fetches the latest Swiss unemployment statistics, specifying it includes national totals, rates, year-over-year comparisons, and optionally cantonal breakdowns. This distinguishes it from siblings like seco_get_job_seekers or seco_get_unemployment_by_occupation, which focus on different aspects.

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 this tool (for overall unemployment stats) but does not explicitly exclude other cases or mention alternatives. With sibling tools listed, the context provides some guidance, but no direct 'when not to use' or comparison to siblings is given.

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