get_institution_profile

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or pagination. The description does not even state that the tool retrieves data; it merely labels the output as 'profile.' For a tool with no annotations, the description carries the full burden, which it fails to meet.

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 short (one line plus translation) but fails to be useful. It is under-specified rather than efficiently concise. Important information is missing.

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 lack of output schema, annotations, and parameter descriptions, this tool definition is severely incomplete. An agent cannot determine what data the tool returns, how to interpret the inputs, or any side effects.

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%. The description does not explain what 'market' or 'institution_id' represent, what valid values are, or how to construct the required inputs. The schema itself provides no descriptions, so the tool is largely unusable without external knowledge.

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?

Description is nearly a tautology: 'Institution profile - 机构概况/机构详情.' It does not specify what the profile contains (e.g., name, address, sector) and does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_institution_holdings or get_institution_list.

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. For example, it does not indicate whether this returns basic static info vs. dynamic holdings or distribution data.

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