每日报告-最新

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It states '读取' (read), indicating a read-only operation, and names the reports table. However, it does not disclose behavior when rtype is empty, the return format, pagination, or edge cases, leaving notable gaps.

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 definition is one efficient sentence that front-loads the action and resource, followed by a compact list of allowed rtype values. No filler or redundant information.

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?

There is no output schema or annotations, and the description omits return format, default behavior for empty rtype, and any relationship to sibling report tools like report_history or report_by_date. An agent is left with several important unknowns.

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%, and the schema only shows rtype as a string with default ''. The description compensates by enumerating valid values: premarket, noonnews, qualitystock, dailyreview. It stops short of explaining each value's meaning or the effect of omitting rtype, but it adds substantial meaning for the single parameter.

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 '读取' (read) and clearly identifies the resource as the latest scheduled task report from the reports table. It also lists valid rtype values, which helps distinguish it from sibling tools like report_history and report_by_date.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention report_by_date for historical queries, report_history for past reports, or any exclusions. Usage is only implied by the word 'latest'.

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