stock_industry_category_cninfo

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds the specific API endpoint (p_public0002) and return type (pandas.DataFrame), but does not mention pagination, rate limits, or data granularity, so behavioral insight is limited.

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 moderately sized with a source link and reST-style parameter/return docs. It is front-loaded with the Chinese title and purpose, but the URL and verbose param list could be trimmed; still, each part serves documentation.

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?

Without an output schema, the return is only described as a pandas DataFrame of '行业分类数据' (industry classification data), leaving the data structure and contents ambiguous. It also lacks examples or edge-case guidance, so the description is adequate but incomplete for an agent to fully predict the output.

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 provides a bare 'symbol' parameter with no description or enum. The description compensates by listing all eight valid industry standards, clarifying the parameter meaning as a string, and noting the default, which fully resolves parameter semantics.

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 it queries the p_public0002 interface for industry classification data (行业分类数据), giving a clear verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling industry tools like stock_industry_change_cninfo or stock_industry_pe_ratio_cninfo.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only documents the API endpoint and parameter choices, with no context or exclusions.

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