获取COMEX库存数据

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 identifies the data domain and commodity but does not say whether the data is historical or current, what units are returned, whether it is read-only, or what the response shape looks like. Given the lack of an output schema, this is a significant gap.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It is appropriately concise, though the first half largely restates the tool title and could have been used to add more differentiating context.

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 two-parameter read tool, the schema covers invocation details and the description states the data source and intended use. However, without annotations, output schema, return-format hints, or sibling guidance, the description is adequate but not 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and both 'limit' and 'metal' are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no meaningful parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('获取') and a specific resource ('COMEX交易所黄金或白银库存数据'), and even adds a use case ('判断供需关系'). It clearly conveys the core function, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling precious-metal or inventory tools like pm_spot_prices, pm_etf_holdings, or futures_inventory.

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 phrase '用于判断供需关系' implies the tool is meant for supply-demand analysis of COMEX gold or silver. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over related alternatives, and no exclusions or special conditions are mentioned.

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