Money Flow

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It lists data types but omits key traits: read-only nature, data granularity (daily?), rate limits, authentication needs, and error handling. The description is inadequate for a tool with no annotation support.

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 purpose and includes details on data types. However, it could be slightly clearer by separating purpose from data items.

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, the description should explain return format and data frequency. It describes the data fields adequately but misses behavioral context like read-only and update timing. Adequate but not 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%, baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining that omitting ts_code queries market-level data, which clarifies the optional parameter. However, it does not elaborate on date format beyond the schema.

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 capital flow data for individual stocks and market, specifying the types of flows (主力, 超大单, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like stock_data or index_data by focusing on money flow specifically.

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?

The description implies usage via ts_code optionality for stock vs market, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like stock_data or margin_trade. No exclusions or when-not-to-use are provided.

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