stock_main_stock_holder

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds an important behavioral detail beyond annotations: the result may be limited to the top 5 shareholders for specific stocks/timepoints. No contradiction with 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 reasonably concise with a clear docstring structure (param/type/return/rtype). It has some redundancy by repeating the tool title at both the beginning and the return section, but the URL and P.S. note are useful and not excessive.

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 simple single-parameter tool, the description covers the core purpose and a key limitation. However, without an output schema, it only states that a pandas DataFrame is returned without specifying columns or expected contents, which is a gap for an agent to understand the result fully.

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 schema has no description for the 'stock' parameter, so the description's ':param stock: 股票代码' and ':type stock: str' provide necessary context that it is a stock code. The URL and examples give format hints, but the description does not explain required vs optional or discuss edge cases.

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 tool as retrieving Sina Finance's major shareholders data (新浪财经-股本股东-主要股东) for a given stock, with a supporting URL and return type. It conveys the resource and scope, though it lacks an explicit action verb and does not differentiate from similar shareholder-related sibling tools.

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 P.S. note provides a usage caveat (only top 5 shareholders for certain stocks at certain times) and an example stock code (000002), implying when it is appropriate to use. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over other shareholder-focused tools or mention exclusions.

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