get_future_info

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, or rate limits. It only states the basic function, leaving the agent uninformed about side effects or constraints.

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, using two short sentences including a Chinese translation and example. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it could include slightly more detail without becoming verbose.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It fails to explain what the output looks like or provide sufficient context about the 'codes' parameter. For a simple info tool, it is barely adequate but lacks completeness.

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 only parameter 'codes' has no schema description (0% coverage). The description adds an example 'SG.CNmain', hinting that codes are futures contract codes, but does not explain the format, valid values, or how to specify multiple codes. This is insufficient for proper usage.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'futures contract info'. It specifies the type of info (size, last trade day, sessions) and provides an example code 'SG.CNmain'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_stock_info or get_option_chain.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use. With many sibling tools, the agent lacks context to choose correctly.

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