get_qhkc_fund_money_change

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint true, so the safety profile is established. The description adds the data availability range and shows the output format via sample data, but doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, error handling, or rate limits. No contradiction 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 is bloated by a large sample DataFrame extending dozens of rows, which consumes most of the text. Essential information like the availability range and param meanings is buried at the top, but the sample output overwhelms. This is not concise nor well-structured for quick agent parsing.

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?

Given no output schema, the sample data compensates by showing the columns (name, value, ratio, date) and the return type (pandas.DataFrame). The data range is stated, and defaults are in schema. However, the misleading param description and lack of error handling info leave some gaps.

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 no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate, but it fails. The param documentation labels date as "中文名称" (Chinese name), which is misleading, and doesn't clarify the expected date format (YYYYMMDD vs YYYY-MM-DD). The availability range is provided but not explicitly linked to the date parameter.

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 turnover distribution ("成交额分布") from the Qihuo Kechai data source, and specifies the available date range. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_qhkc_fund_bs and get_qhkc_fund_position by focusing on transaction amount distribution, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 only states the data availability range and parameters, with no mention of exclusions or preferred contexts. The agent is left to infer usage from the name.

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