能量潮

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

注释已经声明 readOnlyHint=true 和 openWorldHint=true，工具安全属性已有保障。描述在此基础上补充了它会先拉取 K 线、基于开盘与收盘方向累计成交量的计算逻辑，并指出返回的是‘稳定序列’，这些信息有一定价值。不过没有说明数据缺失、K线不足、边界情况等行为，也只能算中等透明。

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?

描述非常简短，前置说明了核心功能，没有冗余信息。除“直连”一词与为何要“稳定序列”外，整体表达紧凑，值得给较高评分。

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?

有输出 schema 且是只读计算类工具，降低了部分负担，但仍有 4 个参数、0% schema 描述覆盖、且存在大量指标类兄弟工具，描述未提供使用场景、参数含义或与其他指标工具的区别，上下文信息不充分，不足以支持可靠的工具选择与调用决策。

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?

输入 Schema 的参数描述覆盖率为 0%，且描述文本没有对 symbol、interval、limit、period 四个参数做出进一步解释。描述只提到“先拉取 K 线”，但未说明 period 如何参与 OBV 计算，也未说明 limit 与 period 的关系，agent 无法从描述中获得额外参数语义。

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?

描述明确说明了‘拉取 K 线后计算 OBV’，即该工具的核心动作与计算对象，并指出返回的是结合开盘/收盘方向的累计成交量序列。虽然没有点名区分某个具体兄弟工具，但‘OBV/能量潮’这一指标身份清晰，足以与 VWAP、RSI 等其他指标区分。

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?

描述完全没有说明何时应使用 OBV，而非其他工具，如 MACD、RSI 或成交类指标。多个兄弟指示器之间也没有任何引导或排除关系，仅靠‘直连版’无法帮助 agent 判断该工具最适合的场景。没有提供任何条件或备选项说明。

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