futures_settle_cffex

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description only needs to add context. It explains the default date behavior (current trading day) and accepted date formats, which is useful. However, it does not disclose any potential limitations, error conditions, or the exact scope of returned data beyond '结算参数数据'.

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 front-loaded with the exchange name and URL, followed by clear parameter documentation. Every sentence serves a purpose, though the URL could be considered optional. The docstring style is efficient.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides enough information for basic usage: what it returns (pandas DataFrame), the parameter format, and default. It could be more specific about the columns or data fields, but the simplicity of the tool makes this acceptable.

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 description fully documents the single 'date' parameter, specifying accepted formats (YYYY-MM-DD, YYYYMMDD, datetime.date object) and the default value. This goes well beyond the schema, which only lists type 'string' and a default, compensating 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 clearly identifies the tool as retrieving settlement parameters from China Financial Futures Exchange (CFFEX), with a URL and resource name. It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying the exchange in the name and title, though it lacks an explicit imperative verb like 'get' or 'query'.

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 explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While sibling tools exist for other exchanges (e.g., futures_settle_czce, futures_settle_ine), the description does not mention them or provide context about when this tool is preferred.

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