set_token

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint: true and readOnlyHint: false, so the agent knows it is a write operation. However, the description adds no context about side effects, whether it overwrites existing tokens, or any permission requirements. With annotations present, some baseline is given, but the description itself contributes nothing.

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 extremely short, but conciseness requires every sentence to add value. Here, it only repeats the tool name, making it under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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 tool with a destructive action and a single opaque parameter, the description provides no operational context. It does not explain how the token will be used, what happens on success, or how to recover from mistakes, making it far from complete.

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% for the single 'token' parameter, and the description does not explain what type of token is expected, where it comes from, or any formatting requirements. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema details.

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 'AKShare API: set_token' merely restates the tool name with a library prefix. It does not state what setting a token does or distinguish this from siblings like get_token or pro_api, providing no actual purpose clarity.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool, when not to, or what prerequisites (e.g., obtaining a token) are required. The description offers no context for selecting this tool over alternatives.

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