get_all_hk_quotes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, setting a safe read-only expectation. The description adds behavioral context by noting built-in concurrency control and highlighting the large data volume, which informs the agent about performance characteristics beyond the annotations.

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 concise and front-loaded with a prominent warning marker. It communicates the essential purpose and a critical caution in just one sentence, with no wasted words or redundant 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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description covers the main purpose, scope, and a key operational caution. It omits details about return format or pagination, but the tool is relatively simple with only two optional parameters, and the provided context is adequate for an agent to understand what the tool does and its risk profile.

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 input schema already provides complete descriptions for both parameters (batchSize and concurrency) with defaults, achieving 100% coverage. The description's mention of '内置并发控制' only echoes this concept without adding new parameter-level detail, so it adds no significant value beyond the schema.

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 specifies the tool's function: retrieving real-time quotes for the entire Hong Kong stock market, explicitly mentioning the 2000+ stocks scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_hk_quotes (which likely targets specific stocks) and other market-specific 'get_all' variants.

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 implies usage for broad market monitoring by referencing '全市场' and warns about large data volume, suggesting caution. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like get_hk_quotes or provide exclusion criteria.

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