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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full behavioral transparency burden. It discloses the data frequency and source but says nothing about error handling, required stock code format, return structure, or any side effects. This is inadequate for a tool that will be invoked programmatically.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the most important attribute (OHLC data) and includes a useful time-range qualifier. No wasted 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?

Given the tool has one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should at least clarify the stock_code format and the shape of the returned data. It only says 'data' without specifying fields like open/high/low/close/volume or response type. The missing parameter format is a critical gap for correct invocation.

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?

The only parameter, stock_code, is a bare string with zero schema description. The description does not explain accepted formats (e.g., '600519' vs 'SH600519'), examples, or constraints. With 0% schema coverage, the description adds no value for parameter understanding.

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 identifies a specific resource: daily OHLC candlestick data with a ~400-day range from Tencent Finance. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings, no other sibling tool name references OHLC, so the purpose is unambiguous. A minor gap is the lack of a verb, but the tool name supplies it.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling data tools like get_stock_overview or get_stock_summary. There is no mention of preferred contexts, prerequisites, or alternatives, leaving the agent to guess which tool fits a query.

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