futures_main_sina

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is established. The description adds the source URL and the dependency on another function for symbol, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as date format expectations, column contents, or pagination behavior.

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 and follows a standard docstring format with title, URL, param/type/return lines. It is not overly verbose, though the URL and repetitive type annotations add little value.

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 should explain return values. It states that the return is a pandas DataFrame of main continuous daily data but does not list columns or describe the data structure. The date format ambiguity and symbol source dependency are also not fully resolved, making the description minimally adequate but incomplete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It gives minimal guidance: symbol should be obtained from futures_display_main_sina, and start_date/end_date are '开始时间'/'结束时间' (start/end times). However, it fails to specify the date format (e.g., YYYYMMDD) or provide examples, leaving the agent to infer from defaults.

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 identifies the resource as Sina Finance futures main continuous daily data (新浪财经-期货-主力连续日数据) and reiterates the return value as 主力连续日数据. It distinguishes itself from many siblings by emphasizing 'main continuous' (主力连续), though it lacks an explicit verb like 'fetch' or 'get'.

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 a useful usage hint by instructing users to obtain the symbol via ak.futures_display_main_sina(). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternative futures data tools (e.g., futures_zh_daily_sina) or mention any prerequisites or date range constraints.

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