stock_hk_index_daily_em

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the return type is a pandas.DataFrame, but provides no additional behavioral context such as data range, columns, or source-specific quirks. It does not contradict the annotations.

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, with a title line, a source URL, and short docstring entries for the parameter and return value. It is reasonably well-structured for a simple tool, though the first line is redundant with the title annotation.

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 no output schema and limited parameter metadata, the description should clarify what the returned '指数数据' actually contains—e.g., daily OHLC, date range, or columns. It only gives the generic phrase '指数数据' and a URL, leaving the output structure ambiguous.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates by defining symbol as '港股指数代码' (HK stock index code) and pointing to a function for obtaining valid codes. However, it lacks concrete examples, format details, or an explanation of what the default value (HSTECF2L) represents.

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 identifies the resource as '港股-股票指数数据' (HK stock index data) and states it returns '指数数据' (index data), but it lacks an explicit verb like '获取' (fetch) and does not mention that this provides daily historical data—its key differentiator from the spot-data sibling. The main distinguishing feature is only implied by the tool name.

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 alternatives such as stock_hk_index_daily_sina or stock_hk_index_spot_em. The only hint, '可以通过 ak.stock_hk_index_spot_em() 获取' (can be obtained via ak.stock_hk_index_spot_em()), addresses how to find the symbol parameter, not which tool to select.

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