industry_sw_daily

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions report content but does not disclose filtering behavior via symbol/start_date/end_date, pagination via limit, or whether this is a read-only query. The relationship to industry_daily_collect/industry_daily_query siblings is also unclear.

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 compact sentence with the core content front-loaded. It earns its place with the category list, but could have included brief parameter or usage hints without losing brevity.

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 values are partially covered elsewhere. However, with 4 parameters at 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and numerous closely related industry/sector sibling tools, the description is incomplete for reliable invocation. It lacks parameter semantics, usage boundaries, and behavioral 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only enumerates report content categories. It does not explain what symbol values are acceptable (e.g., '一级行业', '二级行业', style index names), how limit paginates, or how date range parameters behave. The default '一级行业' is not explained.

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 produces a daily analysis report for Shenwan indices, covering market characterization, primary/secondary industries, style indices, and PE/PB/涨跌幅. This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from generic market tools, though it does not explicitly name sibling differentiators.

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 on when to use this tool versus closely related sibling tools like industry_sw_tree, industry_sw_constituents, sector_valuation, or industry_daily_query. The description does not mention alternatives or exclusion conditions, so an agent cannot reliably choose this over other industry/sector tools.

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