search_quote

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

Discloses rate limit (10/30s) and return fields (market/code/name/sec_type). No annotations are present, but the description covers key behavioral traits. Lacks detail on error handling or pagination behavior.

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 short but includes redundant Chinese text. It is front-loaded with English purpose, but the inclusion of both languages and the rate-limit note could be more streamlined.

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?

Provides enough context for a search tool: keyword search, return fields, rate limit, and a usage hint. Missing details about max_count functionality and result format, but adequate for basic use.

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 'keyword' as the search term but does not explain 'max_count' or its default value (10). The return fields hint at what keyword searches for, but max_count receives no clarification.

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 searches securities/ETFs/plates by keyword, returns specific fields (market, code, name, sec_type), and advises calling this first if unsure of a stock code. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that likely require exact codes.

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?

Explicitly recommends calling this first if unsure of a stock code, providing clear usage context. Also mentions rate limit (10/30s). Does not explicitly list when not to use it, but the sibling context implies alternatives for specific data.

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