stock_info_sh_delist

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds the source URL and return type but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as data freshness, pagination, or rate limits. Since the annotations cover the safety profile, a neutral score is appropriate.

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 concise and directly to the point, containing only the essential elements: the title, source URL, parameter definition, and return type. Every line adds value, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 simple with only one optional parameter, and the description provides the URL and return type. However, the return is described merely as '终止上市公司' without detailing the DataFrame's columns or structure, which would be helpful given there is no output schema. It is sufficient for basic use but not fully complete.

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 no description for the `symbol` parameter (0% coverage), but the description explicitly lists the valid choices: `{"全部", "沪市", "科创板"}`. This compensates for the schema gap, though it doesn't elaborate on the meaning of each choice beyond their obvious translations.

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 as '上海证券交易所-终止上市公司' (Shanghai Stock Exchange - terminated listed companies) and provides the exact source URL, making the tool's scope unambiguous. It is distinguished from siblings like `stock_info_sz_delist` by the 'sh' in the name and the explicit Shanghai reference, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'list'.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention sibling tools such as `stock_info_sz_delist`. Usage is only implied by the parameter choices (`全部`, `沪市`, `科创板`), which suggest filtering by market segment, but there is no stated scenario or exclusion criteria.

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