get_hk_code_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read nature is known. The description adds the scale of the list (2000+ 只), a useful detail beyond the annotation. However, it doesn't disclose return format or potential pagination, but this is a minor gap given the annotation coverage.

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 in Chinese that conveys the purpose and scope without any filler. Every word earns its place, and it is optimally sized for a tool with no parameters.

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 simple 0-parameter tool with a readOnlyHint and no output schema, the description is effectively complete. It states exactly what the tool returns (the full HK code list) and even gives a count estimate, leaving no major missing context.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameter details, and there are none to clarify. This is appropriate for the tool's no-parameter interface.

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 '获取全部港股代码列表（2000+ 只）' clearly states the action (获取) and the resource (全部港股代码列表), specifying the full scope of Hong Kong stock codes. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_all_hk_quotes (which retrieves quotes) and get_a_share_code_list (which covers A-shares).

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 its usage: when an agent needs the complete list of Hong Kong stock codes. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear and unambiguous given the sibling tool names, so the tool is easy to select correctly.

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