index_stock_cons

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that it returns a pandas DataFrame and provides a source URL, which gives some context. However, it does not disclose any additional behaviors such as rate limits, pagination, or error handling, which the annotations do not cover.

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 structured with sections for URL, params, and returns, but it contains redundancy: '最新股票指数的成份股目录' appears both in the first line and the return description. The included URL is not essential for the AI agent and adds noise. It is moderately concise but could be tightened.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides the return type (pandas DataFrame) and parameter guidance. However, it lacks details about the DataFrame columns or any potential edge cases, which would be helpful given the absence of an output schema. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 has no description for the 'symbol' parameter and coverage is 0%. The description compensates by explaining that symbol is the index code and suggesting how to obtain it via ak.index_stock_info(). This adds meaningful guidance beyond the schema, which only shows a default value.

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 retrieves the latest constituent stocks of a stock index (最新股票指数的成份股目录). It uses an implicit 'get' verb and specifies the resource (index constituents). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like index_stock_cons_sina or index_stock_cons_csindex, missing the chance to distinguish itself.

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 explains how to obtain the symbol parameter via ak.index_stock_info(), which is parameter-oriented rather than usage context. No when-to-use or alternative recommendations are given.

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