Skip to main content
Glama
malkreide

seco-labor-mcp

by malkreide

Jugendarbeitslosigkeit Schweiz

seco_get_youth_unemployment
Read-only

Get Swiss cantonal youth unemployment (ages 15-24) as count or rate, plus seasonal patterns for education planning.

Instructions

Jugendarbeitslosigkeit (15–24) — national keine Quelle, in zwei Kantonen schon.

National liefert dieses Werkzeug keine Zahlen. Eine Suche über den ganzen Bestand von opendata.swiss nach «Jugendarbeitslosigkeit» ergab am 2026-08-14 null Datensätze. SECO erhebt die Zahl und zeigt sie auf amstat.ch, veröffentlicht sie aber nicht als Datei.

Zwei Kantone publizieren sie, und zwar in unterschiedlicher Form:

  • TG als Anzahl registrierter Arbeitsloser und Stellensuchender der Altersklasse 15–24, monatlich seit 2016.

  • ZG als Quote, monatlich seit 1993.

Eine Anzahl und eine Quote sind nicht ineinander umrechenbar, solange die Bezugsgrösse fehlt. Das Werkzeug gibt deshalb aus, was der jeweilige Kanton führt, und beschriftet es — statt beides zu einer Zahl zu verschmelzen.

Was es stattdessen gibt: die Einordnung, die eine Zahl brauchbar macht — das saisonale Muster und was daraus für die Bildungsplanung folgt. Das ist Fachwissen und keine Messung, und es steht hier als solches.

Die frühere Fassung nannte an dieser Stelle «+2'186 Jugendarbeitslose (+18.6%)» als Beispielwert aus einem Snapshot. Eine als Beispiel eingeführte Zahl wird als Zahl zitiert; der Zusatz «Snapshot» überlebt das Zitieren nicht.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYesContains: - canton (Optional[str]): Kantonscode; ändert am Ergebnis nichts. - response_format (str): 'markdown' oder 'json'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / params / description
      Previous value: -"Contains:\n- canton (Optional[str]): Canton code (e.g. 'ZH'). None = national.\n- response_format (str): 'markdown' or 'json'"New value: +"Contains:\n- canton (Optional[str]): Kantonscode; ändert am Ergebnis nichts.\n- response_format (str): 'markdown' oder 'json'"
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and non-destructive; the description adds meaningful behavior: no national dataset exists, count vs. quote are not interchangeable, and the tool labels the data and includes expert interpretation rather than merging figures. The only gap is unspecified behavior for unsupported or invalid canton codes, which is minor given the openWorldHint.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is substantial but overlong, with a final paragraph about the previous version's example value that is irrelevant for tool selection or invocation. The key limitation is front-loaded, but several sentences repeat or editorialize rather than help an agent call the tool correctly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description thoroughly covers the data-availability situation and the difference between count and rate, but it leaves the actual invocation ambiguous: an agent cannot confidently determine how to request TG vs. ZG data, and the schema's contradictory canton description is not resolved. Since output schema exists, return-format details are covered, but the operational ambiguity is a significant gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 even though the tool description adds little parameter-level detail. The description mentions TG and ZG but does not clarify how the canton parameter selects between them, especially since the schema itself says the canton code 'ändert am Ergebnis nichts' (changes nothing about the result).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the resource clearly: youth unemployment for ages 15–24 in Switzerland, with the caveat that no national series exists and only two cantons publish data. It also explains what the tool returns (the canton's own figure, labeled, plus seasonal/educational context). It does not explicitly compare itself to sibling tools, so it misses the top score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the tool is for youth-unemployment data in TG and ZG, and the description explicitly warns that national queries yield no numbers. However, it gives no concrete 'use this when...' guidance and names no alternatives among the sibling tools for national or general unemployment data.

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