get_szse_section

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return shape and the existence of an {error} outcome, which is useful signal about failure behavior, but it says nothing about permissions, what happens when the section name isn't found in the outline, or rate/PDF-fetch limits.

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?

Front-loaded single sentence stating the action, followed by a compact return-shape block. Efficient overall, though the return-shape list is somewhat redundant given a full output schema exists.

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?

For a 3-required-param tool with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description omits the parameter semantics and routing guidance an agent needs. An output schema exists so return values are partly covered, but the input-side gaps leave the definition under-specified.

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?

All three parameters have 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate and it does not. 'Named section' gives only a faint hint about the section parameter and nothing about year format or what ticker_or_name accepts (ticker vs. company name, exchange prefix, etc.).

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?

States a specific verb (extract) and resource (a named section from a SZSE company's annual-report PDF), and the 'SZSE' + 'annual-report PDF' scoping distinguishes it from get_sse_section, get_bse_section, and get_hk_section. It stops short of differentiating it from the generic get_section/extract_section siblings, so it's clear but not fully disambiguating.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternatives among the many sibling section/filing tools. The agent must infer that this is the SZSE-specific variant from the name alone.

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