get_industry_constituents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds that it returns real-time quotes for all stocks, which is useful, but doesn't disclose return structure or any pagination/rate-limit behavior.

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 sentence that immediately states the purpose and outcome. No filler words; it's front-loaded 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 one-parameter read-only tool, the description covers what it returns (real-time quotes for all constituent stocks) and the input is fully specified in the schema. However, without an output schema, the exact return fields are not disclosed, which is a minor 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 description for 'symbol' fully explains it accepts either an industry sector name (e.g., '小金属') or code (e.g., 'BK1027'), so the description adds no further parameter meaning. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 retrieves the constituent list of an industry sector and returns real-time quotes for all stocks. The verb '获取' and resource '行业板块成分股列表' are specific, and the distinction from concept-sector constituents is implied by '行业'.

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 the tool is for when you need the list of stocks in an industry sector with real-time quotes, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives like get_concept_constituents or get_industry_spot.

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