资金面快照（两融·北向·南向·公募·社保·国家队）

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

描述揭示了“拉取并落盘”这一副作用，且无注解覆盖，这是有价值的行为披露。但input-schema中force参数已提到“绕过缓存强制重新拉取并落盘”，描述并未在结构化字段之外增加更多行为细节，也未说明刷新频率、覆盖机制或失败影响。

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?

描述为一句紧凑的句式，先给出核心动作“拉取并落盘”，再用冒号列出多维内容，最后说明用途。没有任何冗余信息，全部句子均承载有效信息。

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?

对于无必填参数、存在输出schema的复合快照工具，描述已覆盖用途、数据维度、副作用及使用场景。“社保/国家队代理指标”略显笼统，但不影响agent判断是否调用及如何调用。

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?

输入参数force在schema中已有100%覆盖的说明（绕过缓存强制重新拉取并落盘），描述本身没有增加额外参数语义。按规则schema覆盖率高时给予基线3分。

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?

描述以明确的动词“拉取并落盘”搭配资源“资金面多维动向”，并具体列出两融、北向/南向、公募ETF、社保/国家队等维度，清楚说明工具的复合快照性质。虽未直接点名与兄弟工具的区别，但多维组合本身已与单一指标类工具（如northbound_funds、margin_balance）形成区分。

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?

描述明确说明“用于个股速览待机页”，给出了清晰的使用场景和上下文。但没有提及不适用场景或替代工具选择的排除条件，属于“有明确上下文、无排除说明”的层级。

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