stock_cg_lawsuit_cninfo

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, and the description adds that it returns a pandas DataFrame and returns an empty DataFrame if the source has no records. This adds some behavioral context beyond annotations, but it does not describe the DataFrame's columns or data freshness.

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 a compact docstring with a title, URL, parameter documentation, and return type, all in a clear structure. Every line adds necessary information without excess verbosity.

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?

The tool is a simple read-only data retrieval with no output schema, and the description explains the return type and empty-case behavior. However, it lacks detail on the expected date format and the specific fields/columns in the returned DataFrame, which limits an agent's ability to use the data without further exploration.

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 parameter descriptions (0% coverage), but the description compensates by listing the allowed values for symbol ({'全部', '深市主板', '沪市', '创业板', '科创板'}) and the meaning of start_date and end_date as '开始统计时间' and '结束统计时间'. However, it does not specify the exact date format expected.

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's function: retrieving corporate lawsuit data from the cninfo Data Center, as shown by the title '巨潮资讯-数据中心-专题统计-公司治理-公司诉讼' and the source URL. The resource is specific and distinct from sibling tools like stock_cg_equity_mortgage_cninfo, though it doesn't explicitly state a verb like 'get'.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus other lawsuit-related or cninfo tools. The description only states what the tool does and its parameters, with no mention of alternatives or exclusions.

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