futures_settle

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds that date defaults to the current trading day, accepts multiple date formats, and returns a pandas DataFrame in unified format, adding value beyond annotations. No contradictions with 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 uses a standard Python docstring format, listing parameters, types, and return type without extraneous text. It is efficient and well-structured, though the first line duplicates the annotation title.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers parameter semantics, defaults, and return type sufficiently. It lacks detail on the DataFrame columns, but that is not essential given the tool's simplicity; however, it does not clarify when to use this generic tool versus exchange-specific siblings.

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?

Schema only reveals two string parameters with defaults; the description enriches by explaining valid date formats (YYYY-MM-DD, YYYYMMDD, or datetime.date), default behavior (current trading day), and market code mappings (CFFEX-中金所, etc.). This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 '期货交易所结算参数' and includes ':return: 结算参数数据（统一格式）', making clear it returns futures exchange settlement parameters for a given date and market. However, it lacks an explicit imperative verb like 'get' or 'retrieve', and does not differentiate from sibling tools like futures_settle_cffex.

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 parameter details but no guidance on when to use this tool versus the exchange-specific siblings (futures_settle_cffex, futures_settle_ine, etc.). There is no mention of alternatives or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer the tool's role.

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