Index Data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It only states basic functionality (retrieve data, export formats) but omits details like read-only nature, required permissions, error behavior, or data structure returned. This is insufficient for a full behavioral understanding.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the primary purpose. It efficiently conveys core information without extraneous details, though it could benefit from structured presentation of key points.

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?

The description lacks information about the return value or output format beyond mention of CSV/JSON export. Without an output schema, the agent does not know what data fields (e.g., OHLCV, date) are returned. This is a significant gap for a data retrieval tool.

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% and parameters are well-described in the schema. The description adds minimal additional value beyond examples (code format, export types). Since schema already documents parameters, a baseline score of 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 tool retrieves data for a specified stock index, provides examples (Shanghai Composite, Shenzhen Component), and mentions export formats. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like stock_data (individual stocks) and fund_data.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the name implies index data usage, there is no explicit comparison to sibling tools or mention of exclusions. The agent must infer context from the title alone.

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