get_futures_quote

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description correctly states the read-only nature (getting a quote) and does not contradict annotations. However, it adds minimal behavioral detail beyond what annotations convey, such as potential rate limits or data freshness.

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: one sentence for purpose, a strategy tag, and an example tag. Every element serves a purpose with no wasted words, and the structure is front-loaded with the core action.

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?

The description is adequate given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter) and robust annotations. However, it lacks explicit mention of what the output contains (e.g., multiple futures quotes when exchange is empty). Since an output schema exists, this is a minor gap.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the 'exchange' parameter. The description compensates by listing the valid exchange codes and explaining the optional behavior with an example. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema's type and default.

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 'Get futures quote' and lists the specific exchanges (SHFE, DCE, CZCE, CFFEX, INE), which differentiates it from sibling tools that retrieve quotes for other asset types (e.g., get_option_quote, get_forex_quote, get_quote for stocks).

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 includes a strategy: 'Leave exchange empty for all; specify for a single exchange.' This provides clear guidance on parameter usage. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or direct users to alternatives among siblings.

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