stock_profit_sheet_by_yearly_em

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns a pandas.DataFrame and specifies the data source, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as data coverage gaps, delisted-stock behavior, or rate limits. It provides modest value beyond 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 and structured: a title line, a source URL, then a concise docstring with param/return sections. It avoids unnecessary prose and is easy to scan, though the title line partially duplicates the tool name.

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 single-parameter read-only tool, the description is adequate: it specifies the data source, the period, and the return type (DataFrame). However, there is no output schema and the description does not elaborate on what columns or data fields the DataFrame contains, leaving the agent to infer the structure from domain knowledge.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explicitly documents the 'symbol' parameter: '股票代码; 带市场标识' (stock code with market identifier) and type str. The URL example 'code=sh600519' illustrates the expected format (market-prefixed code), giving the agent concrete guidance for parameter construction.

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 states this tool retrieves the annual income statement (利润表-按年度) for stocks from Eastmoney, with a provided URL. It distinguishes from sibling tools like stock_profit_sheet_by_quarterly_em and stock_profit_sheet_by_report_em by specifying the '按年度' (annual) timeframe, making the resource and period unambiguous.

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 does not explicitly discuss when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., quarterly or report versions). The name and the '按年度' phrasing imply that it is for annual data, but no direct guidance is given about when an agent should prefer this over sibling profit-sheet tools.

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