futures_news_shmet

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 clear. The description adds parameter choices and return type but does not disclose data structure, pagination, or rate limits. This is minimal additional value beyond 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 is a compact docstring with labeled sections for parameters, types, and returns. It is front-loaded with the name and URL, and contains no unnecessary fluff. The structure is clear and easy to parse.

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 only one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the source, parameter domain, and return type. However, it does not describe the DataFrame columns or the content of the news flashes, leaving some ambiguity about what the agent will receive.

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, but the description lists all allowed values (全部, 要闻, VIP, 财经, 铜, 铝, etc.), which is critical since schema coverage is 0%. This gives an agent explicit guidance on valid inputs, though it does not explain each category in detail.

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 provides the resource name '上海金属网-快讯' and a URL, indicating it is about Shanghai Metal Network news, but lacks an explicit verb like 'fetch' or 'get'. It differentiates from siblings by naming the specific source, but the purpose is implied rather than clearly stated.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of comparison with other news tools or any prerequisites. The usage context is only implied by the URL and parameter choices.

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