Philippine labor-force indicators

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: the data is from the latest published reference period and the region argument is a caveat only, as the table has no regional breakdown. This goes beyond annotations and prevents misuse.

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 concise and well-structured: a short opening sentence identifies the tool, the next sentence lists the outputs, and a final sentence explains the important caveat. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff or repetition.

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 simple parameter set, presence of annotations and output schema, and the detailed caveat, the description is complete. It specifies the type of indicators, the national scope, and the region handling, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, and the schema already fully explains the 'region' parameter, including its purpose as a caveat for API symmetry. The description restates this information but does not add new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 returns Philippine labor-force indicators from the PSA Labor Force Survey, and enumerates the specific rates (participation, employment, unemployment, underemployment). This specific verb+resource differentiates it from sibling tools like get_poverty_stats or get_inflation_stats.

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 provides clear context on what data is returned and emphasizes the national scope, which helps an agent know when to use it and what to expect. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions, but the distinction from siblings is implicit and sufficient for this single-purpose tool.

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