get_kline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains input format, supported markets, and return type (Markdown table). However, it does not disclose behavioral traits like data frequency limitations, rate limits, or data update frequency.

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 well-structured with sections for Args, Returns, and Examples. It is concise, front-loading the purpose, and every sentence provides value 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 tool has 4 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers inputs comprehensively and explains the return format. It lacks details on edge cases or limitations, but the examples and parameter descriptions make it functionally complete.

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%, and the description adds essential semantics: stock_code format (e.g., 300750.SZ), date format (YYYY-MM-DD), frequency options (d, w, m, 5, 15, 30, 60), and examples. This far exceeds the schema's minimal type information.

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 function: retrieving K-line data for stocks in a specified date range, supporting A-shares, B-shares, H-shares, and market indices. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on other financial data types.

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 implicitly defines usage for obtaining historical price data through parameter and example details. It lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives, but the tool's specific purpose and sibling context make it clear.

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