futures_delivery_dce

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering safety. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond repeating the title and the date parameter. It does not disclose pagination, rate limits, data coverage, or how the date is interpreted beyond '交割日期'.

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 compact but somewhat unstructured, mixing a title, a URL, and docstring-style param/return lines. It contains no fluff, but the format is purely technical and the URL is not explained. It could be more readable with a simple sentence, but it is not excessively long.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain the return value. It only says 'returns Dalian Commodity Exchange delivery statistics as a pandas.DataFrame' without detailing columns (e.g., contract, delivery volume, delivery price) or any other output characteristics. This leaves the agent with insufficient information to anticipate the result structure.

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 one optional 'date' parameter with default '202312', and schema description coverage is 0%. The description's param line only says '交割日期' (delivery date) with type str, but does not specify the expected format (e.g., YYYYMM or YYYY-MM), whether it is a single month or range, or any examples. The default value hints at YYYYMM, but this is not explicit.

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 identifies the specific resource (Dalian Commodity Exchange delivery statistics) and includes the official URL. While it lacks an explicit verb like 'fetch' or 'retrieve', the combination of the tool name and description makes the function's purpose clear. It is distinguishable from sibling tools for other exchanges (e.g., futures_delivery_czce) by naming DCE explicitly.

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 alternatives. It does not mention that this is for DCE (though the name implies it) or explain any exclusions. No comparison with sibling delivery statistics tools for other exchanges is offered.

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