get_stock_news

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It states the tool returns a news/announcement feed but does not disclose whether it is read-only, any rate limits, pagination behavior beyond the page parameter, or what happens with invalid symbols. Minimal behavioral disclosure beyond the obvious read operation.

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?

Description is concise with a clear Args list, front-loaded with the purpose. No redundant sentences, each parameter is explained efficiently. Minor formatting choice (code block) is acceptable.

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's moderate complexity (4 params, one required) and the presence of an output schema (so return format is covered elsewhere), the description covers the essential invocation details. Missing are edge-case behaviors or example usage, but overall sufficient for a straightforward data-retrieval tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains each parameter: symbol as stock code, kind distinguishing news vs. notice, count with max limit of 30, and page for pagination. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema (which only has defaults and types), though it could be more detailed about possible values for kind.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves individual stock news or announcements (个股新闻或公告流), with parameters distinguishing news vs. notices. It is specific about the resource (stock news/announcements) and distinct from sibling tools like get_stock_discussions or get_hot_posts, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only lists parameters and their meanings, leaving the agent to infer usage context. Does not mention prerequisites, alternative tools, or exclusions.

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