futures_klines

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It merely states the function without disclosing any behavioral traits (e.g., read-only, destructive, rate limits, data freshness).

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 very short (one sentence, no fluff). It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it could benefit from slight expansion.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., historical klines). Given that this is a data retrieval tool, the description is insufficiently 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 coverage is 100%, meaning the input schema fully documents parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema (it does not mention any parameters). Baseline 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 clearly states the action (获取, get) and resource (期货K线数据, futures K-line data). It is a specific verb+resource but does not differentiate from sibling tools. Among siblings, there is no other klines tool, so it is distinguishable.

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 (e.g., futures_prices, indicator tools). The description is a single phrase without any context on use cases or exclusions.

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