get_futures_inventory_symbols

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the output is a list of variety codes, but it does not disclose additional behaviors such as response format, whether the list is exhaustive, or any rate limits. No contradiction with 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 a single, concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action ('获取') and resource, making it immediately scannable and efficient.

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?

For a zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys the return value (all queryable inventory codes). Minor improvement would be mentioning how this integrates with get_futures_inventory, but the current description is adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain. Baseline for no-parameter tools is 4, and the description correctly omits parameter details.

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 explicitly states it retrieves a list of futures warehouse receipt/inventory symbols and returns all variety codes with queryable inventory. This clearly distinguishes it from related tools like get_futures_inventory, which would return actual inventory data for specified symbols.

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?

Usage context is implied but not explicit. The description suggests this tool provides available inventory symbols, but it does not explicitly state 'use this before get_futures_inventory' or mention any alternatives/exclusions. No direct when-to-use guidance is provided.

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