stock_fhps_detail_em

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. Description adds the source URL and return type (pandas.DataFrame). It doesn't add behavioral context like rate limits or pagination, but annotations cover the most important operational traits.

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 compact and contains essential elements: source, section, URL example, parameter definition, return type. It's structured like a typical docstring with clear labels. Could be slightly more readable but every line is useful.

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?

With one optional parameter (default given), a clear return type, and strong annotations, the core usage is covered. However, no mention of what the returned DataFrame contains (columns, indices) or whether the default symbol is meaningful. The URL example is helpful but the tool's overall scope (dividend details) is only loosely described.

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 descriptions cover 0% of the parameter. The description explains that symbol is a 股票代码 (stock code) and provides an example '300073' in the URL, adding meaning beyond the bare schema. This is sufficient for a single simple parameter.

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 states a clear action: retrieving 分红送配详情 (dividend/distribution details) from 东方财富网's data center for a given stock code. The title and description align, and the specific URL example clarifies the resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like stock_fhps_em or stock_fhps_detail_ths, but the target (东财 detail page) is clear.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid stock code) or contrast with sibling tools like stock_fhps_detail_ths (THS version) or stock_fhps_em (list). The only usage hint is the parameter needing a stock code, which is implied but not explicit.

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