Check the current status of economic cycle data cache to determine if cached data is available and up to date.
查看周期数据缓存状态
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, and the description only states the action without disclosing side effects, required permissions, or data source. The verb '查看' suggests read-only behavior, but this is not explicitly stated.
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 is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it ideal for a zero-parameter tool.
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?
An output schema exists, so return-value details are not needed. However, the description does not clarify what '周期数据' encompasses or distinguish when to use this tool instead of the generic 'cache_status' sibling, leaving a minor contextual 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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is effectively 100%. Since there are no parameters to document, the description doesn't need to add parameter-level details; the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4.
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?
Description uses specific verb '查看' (view) and resource '周期数据缓存状态' (cycle data cache status), clearly indicating a read operation. It implicitly differentiates from sibling 'cache_status' by adding the 'cycle' qualifier, though it doesn't explicitly name the alternative.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'cache_status' or when it would be inappropriate. The description simply states what it does without any contextual usage cues.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.