问财选可转债（同花顺问财）

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that data comes from 同花顺问财 (iwencai.com) and that selection is condition-based. However, it does not describe expected output shape, result behavior, external dependency risks, or whether any side effects occur.

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 concise and efficient: one sentence defines what the tool does and another gives the data source. There is no redundant phrasing or filler, and the main purpose appears first.

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 3-parameter query tool, the description is reasonably complete regarding purpose and data source, but there is no output schema and the description does not explain what the returned result contains. It also lacks guidance on query formulation beyond the schema's note about rewriting into standard financial queries.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds some context about what the query may contain (multiple filter conditions), but it does not add meaningful detail beyond the schema's descriptions for page, limit, or query.

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's purpose: selecting convertible bonds via multiple financial criteria, and the title specifies the asset class. It is distinct from sibling select_* tools by explicitly targeting 可转债 (convertible bonds), so an agent can tell it apart from select_astock, select_etf, etc.

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?

Usage is implied: use this tool when filtering convertible bonds using conditions like conversion premium, underlying stock performance, rating, and remaining maturity. However, there are no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives instructions, nor any mention of when not to use it.

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