get_commodity_option_kline

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

The description adds the behavioral detail that data is daily ('日 K 线'), which is not fully captured by the tool name alone. However, it omits other behavioral traits such as return format, pagination, or any limitations. Given the readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this as a read-only operation, the added context is modest but acceptable.

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, clear sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is appropriately sized with no wasted words or redundant phrases.

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 tool's low complexity (one parameter, no nested objects, no output schema), the description is mostly sufficient. It does not explain the return value structure, but the name and description strongly imply K-line data, and the schema example clarifies the symbol format. The lack of usage guidance is the main 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 covers the single parameter 'symbol' completely, including an example format. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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's function: getting daily K-line data for commodity option contracts. It uses a specific verb ('获取') and a specific resource ('商品期权合约日 K 线'), which effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like index option K-line or futures K-line.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tools. Users are left to infer usage solely from the tool name and the short description.

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