stock_restricted_release_summary_em

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that data comes from East Money and returns a pandas DataFrame, but it does not disclose potential network dependency, data freshness, or pagination behavior. It does not contradict the 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 follows a clear docstring structure: title, URL, parameter definitions, and return type. It is front-loaded with the title and URL, and each line serves a purpose. Some lines like ':type' are redundant but not harmful, keeping it reasonably 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?

With no output schema, the description should explain return values more thoroughly. It only says the return is 限售股解禁 as a DataFrame, without specifying columns, granularity, or how this summary differs from detail tools. Annotations cover safety, but the description lacks enough context for an agent to fully understand the data structure and use cases.

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 description documents each parameter in Chinese: symbol (target market) with explicit allowed values, start_date (start time), and end_date (end time). This adds meaning beyond the bare schema. However, the date format is ambiguous: the URL example uses hyphens (2022-11-08) while schema defaults use YYYYMMDD (20221209), which could lead to incorrect usage.

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 indicates this tool provides restricted share release (限售股解禁) summary data from East Money's data center, with a URL and return type. The tool name includes 'summary', distinguishing it from similar tools like stock_restricted_release_detail_em, though the description itself doesn't explicitly state the verb 'get' or 'fetch'.

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 such as stock_restricted_release_detail_em, stock_restricted_release_queue_em, or stock_restricted_release_stockholder_em. It only documents parameters and the source URL, leaving usage context entirely implicit.

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