search_stock

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the search functionality without disclosing behavioral traits such as result format, pagination, or behavior on no match. It does not contradict annotations (none present).

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 very concise—two short sentences including a bilingual explanation and an example. Every word is relevant and contributes to clarity without redundancy.

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 absence of an output schema, the description could be more complete by indicating what the tool returns (e.g., a list of matching stocks). It adequately covers input semantics but leaves the output unspecified.

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 50% (only 'keyword' has a description). The description adds value by explaining what types of keywords are accepted (name/code/pinyin) and giving examples, but it does not clarify the 'limit' parameter's purpose or its default behavior.

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 that the tool searches A-share stocks by name, code, or pinyin, with an example. It is distinct from sibling tools like get_kline or get_stock_quote, which focus on retrieving specific data rather than searching.

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 to find stocks when given a keyword, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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