stock_dzjy_mrtj

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the return type (pandas.DataFrame) and the source URL, which is useful context. However, it does not describe data contents, date handling, or potential limitations like pagination, making the behavioral disclosure minimal.

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 relatively concise but formatted as a docstring with a URL, parameter lines, and return info. It is not front-loaded with a clear summary sentence; the title line serves as a label. Each part is useful, but the structure is slightly clunky.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain what the DataFrame contains. It merely states '每日统计' without listing columns, meaning of data, or any example. Given the tool's apparent complexity (daily block trade statistics), this is a significant omission.

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 must compensate. It provides Chinese labels (开始日期, 结束日期) that add meaning beyond the schema's plain 'string' types. However, it does not specify the expected date format (beyond the default '20220105') or other constraints, leaving room for interpretation.

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 resource: Eastmoney's block trade daily statistics, and includes a direct URL. It lacks an explicit action verb but implies a data retrieval function. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like stock_dzjy_sctj, but the name and resource are specific.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase '每日统计' implies daily aggregate stats, but sibling tools are not mentioned, and no exclusions or alternative references are provided. The parameter docstring gives basic input instructions but no contextual usage.

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