get_fund_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions 'from HTTP sources,' which is trivial and does not reveal side effects, rate limits, data freshness, or that it is a read-only operation. The agent lacks essential behavioral context.

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 short sentence, which is concise but lacks substance. It is not overly verbose, but it sacrifices clarity for brevity. Key information is missing, making it less effective than it could be.

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 two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the return format, pagination (if any), or how the 'limit' parameter affects results. The agent cannot confidently invoke this tool without additional assumptions.

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 0%, and the description does not mention parameters at all. The schema provides enums and defaults, but the meaning of values like 'qfii' is unexplained. The agent must infer parameter semantics solely from the schema, which is insufficient.

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 states 'Get fund list from HTTP sources,' which clearly identifies the action and resource. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling tool 'get_stock_list,' and the reference to 'HTTP sources' is vague. The schema's enum values (etf, lof, qfii, all) are not explained, making the purpose less precise.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_stock' or 'get_stock_list.' Context signals show related sibling tools, but the description does not specify scenarios or criteria for selecting this tool over others.

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