get_valuation_analysis

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

With no annotations, the description adds behavioral context by stating it returns a Markdown table and implies a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits, limiting 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 well-structured with a clear purpose sentence, Args/Returns sections, and examples. It is comprehensive but slightly verbose; could be trimmed by merging the first sentence with Returns.

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 that an output schema exists (true), the description adequately covers parameters and purpose with examples. It lacks detail on output structure beyond 'Markdown table', but the listed metrics partially compensate.

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 description fully compensates for 0% schema coverage by explaining both parameters: stock_code format (e.g., '300750.SZ') and date_type options (1-4 years). This provides meaning beyond 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 it retrieves all valuation analysis data for a stock, listing specific metrics (PE, PB, PS, PC) with current values and historical percentiles. This specific verb-resource description distinguishes it from sibling tools that cover other financial data.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'get_valuation_comparison' or 'get_main_financial_data'. It only describes its own functionality, leaving the agent to infer appropriateness.

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