A股关键指标

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. '获取' indicates a read-only operation, and the market scope is stated. However, it does not disclose any potential limitations such as data source, update frequency, or return format, which would be helpful for full transparency.

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 that immediately states the verb and resource, with no wasted words. It efficiently includes the market scope (Shanghai, Shenzhen) without redundancy.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description gives the essential purpose and market scope. It does not enumerate specific indicators returned, but the title and context make the functionality clear. It is reasonably complete, though listing examples of indicators would make it more comprehensive.

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 schema already documents the only parameter, symbol, as '股票代码'. The description adds that it applies to A-share markets, providing context but no format specifics. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description offers modest additional value.

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 the verb '获取' (get) and specifies the resource as key financial report indicators for A-share stocks on the Shanghai and Shenzhen exchanges. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like stock_indicators_hk and stock_indicators_us by explicitly naming the A-share market.

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 implies usage for A-share financial indicator queries but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. Sibling tool names suggest market-specific counterparts, but no exclusions or alternative guidance is provided within the description itself.

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