search_stock

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds that it supports code/name/pinyin searches and returns results across A-share, HK, and US markets, extending beyond annotation info. It does not contradict the 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose, supported search types, and market scope. Every element is informative and there is no wasted wording.

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 single-parameter search tool with read-only annotation, the description sufficiently covers the operation and scope. The lack of an output schema is partially mitigated by the statement that it returns matching results, though a brief mention of the result format would make it fully complete.

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 already documents the 'keyword' parameter with examples and mentions code/name/pinyin. The description repeats this info without adding new syntax or formatting details, so it provides no extra value beyond the 100% schema coverage.

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 it searches stocks by code, name, or pinyin and returns matching A-share, HK, and US results. The verb 'search' + resource 'stocks' is specific, and the multi-market scope distinguishes it from quote or analysis siblings like get_quotes_by_query or analyze_stock.

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 when to use the tool (when you need to find stocks by keyword) by listing supported search methods and markets. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but for a search tool the context is clear.

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