get_technical_indicators

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the return format (Markdown table) and default page_size, but omits data freshness, rate limits, or any side effects. Given the lack of annotations, this is insufficient for full transparency.

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 concise and well-structured with Args, Returns, and Examples sections. It is not overly verbose, but some sentences could be streamlined. The example is helpful.

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?

With an output schema present (not shown), the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks information on error handling, data range, or limitations. Given the tool's two parameters and output schema, it is moderately complete but could benefit from more context.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the stock_code format (e.g., '300750.SZ') and the default value for page_size (30). However, it does not clarify the meaning of page_size beyond '返回数据条数', which is partially addressed. Overall, it adds significant value over the bare schema.

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 retrieves technical indicator data (MACD, KDJ, RSI, BOLL) for a stock, with a specific verb '获取' and resource '技术指标数据'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by its unique function; no other sibling focuses on technical indicators.

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 usage via Args and Examples, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it, relying on implied usage from the example.

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