get_qhkc_index

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds useful context by showing the return type (pandas.DataFrame) and a sample of the output columns, but does not disclose details like pagination, rate limits, or potential errors. This is above baseline but not rich.

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 front-loaded with the tool's purpose and a list of indices, which is good. However, the large sample data table takes significant space and, while informative, makes the description somewhat verbose. It could be condensed without losing key information.

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 read-only data retrieval tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what data is returned (DataFrame with date, price, volume, etc.), which indices are supported, and parameter meanings. Given the annotations cover safety and idempotency, the description is quite complete, though it could benefit from noting the source URL's default and any limitations.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden. It defines url as '网址' (URL) and name as '中文名称' (Chinese name), and crucially lists all valid name values ('奇货黑链', '奇货商品', etc.), which is essential for correct invocation. The defaults in the schema are also echoed, making parameter usage clear.

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 states the tool obtains QHKC index data and lists the specific indices available. It distinguishes itself from unrelated tools, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling QHKC tools such as get_qhkc_index_trend or get_qhkc_index_profit_loss, so it misses full sibling differentiation.

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 does not mention any exclusions or alternative tools for related data (e.g., profit/loss or trend data), leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and list of indices.

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