search_shareholder_events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, indicating safe, read-only behavior. The description adds the coverage of specific event types but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what the schema (pagination via cursor/limit) provides. Overall, the description adds some context but is not rich in behavioral details.

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 concise—only two sentences—with the purpose front-loaded. Every sentence provides essential information (what the tool does and what it covers) without any redundant or extraneous content.

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 absence of an output schema, the description could have explained the return format or the nature of the events returned (e.g., details provided). It does not do so, leaving the agent to infer the output from the tool name. The description is adequate but not fully complete for a search tool without output schema.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description does not add any extra meaning or usage details beyond the schema. Therefore, it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 tool searches shareholder behavior events, listing specific event types (减持/增持/回购/质押) and their English equivalents (share_reduction, share_increase, share_buyback, pledge_risk). It distinguishes this tool from sibling search tools like search_regulatory_events or search_dividend_events by focusing on insider signals.

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?

The description provides a brief usage hint—'Use for insider signals'—but does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives. The sibling tool list implies alternatives, but the description lacks explicit guidance on selecting between similar search tools.

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