stock_register_sz

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the source URL and return type (pandas.DataFrame) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as data freshness, pagination, or network requirements beyond what openWorldHint implies. This adds some context but not rich detail.

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 short and includes the essential information: source, category, board, URL, and return type. It is structured with line breaks. However, it repeats '深圳主板' twice (in the title and the return line), which is slightly redundant, but overall it is concise.

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 zero-parameter tool with rich annotations, the description provides core information about the data source and return type. However, since there is no output schema, it would be helpful to describe the DataFrame's columns or structure, which is absent. It is adequate 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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there is no parameter ambiguity. The description does not need to explain parameter meanings; the baseline score of 4 applies for zero-parameter tools.

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 data source (East Money Data Center), the category (New Stock Data - IPO Review Information), and the specific market segment (Shenzhen Main Board). The ':return:' line confirms the tool returns data, and the URL provides the exact source. This differentiates it from sibling tools like stock_register_sh or stock_register_kcb, which target different boards.

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 clear context that this tool retrieves IPO review information for the Shenzhen Main Board, which is sufficient to guide an agent when to use it (when such data is needed). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls short of full guidance but is still clear.

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