briefing_stock_watchlist_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It uses '查看' (view) which implies a read-only operation, and it specifies the returned content (list and focus configuration). However, it doesn't disclose any other behavioral traits such as authentication defaults, error handling, or side effects, which are absent but also not surprising for a get tool.

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 highly concise, comprising two sentences: one stating the function and one giving usage triggers. Every sentence is purposeful and front-loaded, with no extraneous content.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns and when to invoke it. It doesn't specify the response structure, but that's not necessary given the simplicity and the absence of an output schema.

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 schema description coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'token', which already explains its meaning and default behavior. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 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's purpose: to view the list of followed stocks and their focus configurations. It uses a specific verb ('查看' = view) and resource ('关注的股票列表'), and it distinguishes this from sibling tools like set, remove, and update_focus.

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 gives explicit trigger phrases ('用户说...等时调用') for when to use the tool, making the usage context clear. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools for modification, though the siblings are obvious.

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