get_company_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden to disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature or authentication needs. It fails to mention any such details, leaving the agent uninformed about side effects or requirements.

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 extremely brief but not concise in a useful way; it wastes space listing redundant language translations instead of delivering functional information. The key term 'company profile' is buried, and no essential details are front-loaded.

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 simplicity (1 param, no output schema, no annotations), the description is critically incomplete. It provides virtually no guidance on input semantics, expected output, or use cases, making it inadequate for reliable invocation.

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 single parameter 'code' has no description in the schema (0% coverage) and the tool description provides no explanation of what 'code' represents (e.g., stock ticker, company ID). This omission forces the agent to guess the parameter's meaning.

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 'Company profile - 公司概况/公司详情/公司简介/company profile/主营业务.' merely restates the tool name and provides synonyms in multiple languages, lacking a specific verb or resource that distinguishes what the tool does. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_stock_info or get_company_executives.

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 usage guidelines or context are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_stock_info or get_company_executives, which may offer similar company data.

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