fund_announcement_dividend_em

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds the source URL and return type (pandas.DataFrame) but doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, or data update frequency. It doesn't contradict annotations.

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 mixes English and Chinese, includes a long source path and URL, and uses structured tags (:param, :return). It's readable but somewhat verbose and redundant with the title. The key info is present, but the structure could be more concise and front-loaded.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the data source, return type, and parameter meaning. However, it lacks usage alternatives, any mention of data coverage or limitations, and doesn't explain what the returned announcement list contains in detail. It's minimally complete but not comprehensive.

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 input schema only defines 'symbol' as a string with a default, with no description in the schema. The tool description compensates by explaining that symbol is the fund code and can be obtained via ak.fund_name_em(). This adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema, though it doesn't specify format examples or edge cases.

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 fetches dividend distribution announcements from East Money's Tiantian Fund website, with the specific category '分红配送' in the name and text. It distinguishes itself from sibling announcement tools like fund_announcement_personnel_em and fund_announcement_report_em by specifying the dividend type, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other announcement tools. It does mention how to obtain the symbol parameter via ak.fund_name_em(), but that's parameter context rather than usage guidance. There's no indication of prerequisites, expected use cases, or exclusions.

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