get_comex_inventory

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not mention pagination, return structure, data units, or any limitations. Since annotations already declare the safety profile, the description fails to contribute additional transparency about how the tool behaves.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. It concisely captures the tool's core function without extraneous words, fitting the simple nature of the tool.

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?

With no output schema and minimal description, the agent lacks essential context about what data is returned and how to interpret it. The tool is simple, but the description does not compensate for missing output structure, leaving the completion incomplete.

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% with both parameters documented (symbol enum with Chinese labels, pageSize as '每页数量'). The description provides no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 '获取 COMEX 黄金/白银库存数据' clearly specifies the action (获取) and the resource (COMEX gold/silver inventory). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_futures_inventory by focusing on the COMEX exchange and specific commodities (gold/silver).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_futures_inventory or get_futures_inventory_symbols. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer suitability without explicit context or exclusions.

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