bond_index_general_cbond

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations—no mention of web fetching, rate limits, authentication, or potential failure modes. It does not contradict annotations, but also provides no additional transparency.

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 docstring with :param: and :return: sections, which is reasonably structured but not front-loaded with a high-level summary. It includes useful parameter choices and the URL but is somewhat verbose for a tool description.

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 provides the return type and the general meaning. It covers parameter choices and references the index list tool, but lacks context on data shape, date handling, error behavior, and differentiation from sibling bond index tools, making it only minimally 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?

The schema has no descriptions or enums (coverage 0%), but the description lists all allowed values for indicator and period, and references available_bond_index() for index_category. This adds essential meaning beyond the schema, though it does not explain the semantics of each choice.

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 it returns '指定指数的指定指标的指定期限分段数据' (segment data for a specified index, indicator, and period) from the China Bond Index family (中债指数族系). This is a clear purpose, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like bond_composite_index_cbond or bond_new_composite_index_cbond, so it lacks sibling distinction.

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 other bond index tools. The only hint is a reference to available_bond_index() for index_category, but no explicit comparisons or exclusions are provided.

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