repo_rate_query

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the data source URL and return type (pandas.DataFrame), but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as data freshness, column structure, or potential limitations.

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 concise and structured as a docstring with title, source URL, parameter documentation, and return type. It is somewhat redundant (title and return phrase largely repeat) but still information-dense and easy to scan.

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 the tool has a single parameter and read-only annotations, the description is reasonably complete. However, it does not describe the DataFrame columns, date range, or frequency of the historical data, and there is no output schema to fill this gap. The lack of distinction from the similar sibling 'repo_rate_hist' also leaves ambiguity.

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 provides no description or enum for the 'symbol' parameter, but the description explicitly lists the allowed values: {'回购定盘利率', '银银间回购定盘利率'}. This is essential information beyond the schema and largely compensates for the 0% schema 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 providing historical repo fixing rate data from the China Foreign Exchange Trade System, with a source URL. It is specific to the resource, though it lacks an explicit verb and does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'repo_rate_hist'.

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 implies usage through the parameter choices but does not state exclusions or mention the similar sibling tool 'repo_rate_hist'.

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