stock_sns_sseinfo

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the source URL and return type, but does not disclose potential pagination, rate limits, or the meaning of 'uid=65'. No contradiction, but limited additional value.

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 front-loaded with the title, followed by the URL and docstring lines. It avoids unnecessary prose, though it repeats '提问与回答' in multiple places. Overall it is efficient for its purpose.

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 the return format more thoroughly; it only says '提问与回答' and rtype str. It does not describe the structure or content of the Q&A data, nor any edge cases. For a simple read-only retrieval tool, this is adequate but leaves gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description explicitly documents the parameter 'symbol' as '股票代码' (stock code), which adds meaningful context beyond the raw schema's type and default. It also specifies its type as str, compensating for the schema's lack of description.

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 title '上证e互动-提问与回答' clearly indicates the tool retrieves Q&A from SSE e-Interactive, and the URL confirms the exact source. The verb is implied (get/fetch) but not explicitly stated, and it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, though the name makes it fairly unique.

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 other stock-related tools, such as stock_news_em or stock_zh_a_hist. It does not mention prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions. The only context is the source URL and parameter documentation.

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