gangtise_cash_flow_hk

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool queries cash flow statements, without mentioning read-only nature, data freshness, rate limits, or permissions. Essential behavioral context is missing.

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 sentence, but it includes redundant date context instructions (bracketed text) that are not strictly part of the tool's purpose. This verges on clutter, reducing conciseness.

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?

With no output schema and 7 parameters, the description is too brief. It fails to explain how parameters interact (e.g., startDate vs fiscalYear) or what return data looks like. More detail is needed for complete understanding.

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%, so the description adds limited value beyond the schema. It mentions filtering by period, fiscal year, and report type, but these are already documented. No additional semantic context is provided for parameters.

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 clearly states the tool queries Hong Kong stock cash flow statements under Chinese accounting standards, with filtering options. The verb '查询' (query) and resource '港股现金流量表' (HK cash flow statement) are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like gangtise_cash_flow (A-shares) and gangtise_cash_flow_quarterly.

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 alternatives such as gangtise_cash_flow or gangtise_cash_flow_quarterly. The description lacks explicit context for selection or exclusions, relying solely on the tool name for differentiation.

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