stock_sz_a_spot_em

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the source URL and return type but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as data volume, columns, or potential delays. With annotations present, the description adds minimal extra context.

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 concise, comprising a clear title line, a helpful source URL, and return type information. It is front-loaded with the key purpose and contains no unnecessary filler, though it could have omitted the URL without losing core meaning.

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 read-only tool, the description provides adequate context: data source, market, data type, and return format. It does not describe the DataFrame columns, but given no output schema and the simplicity of a spot quote tool, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description correctly notes the return type (pandas.DataFrame) but adds no parameter-specific details since there are none. Baseline 4 applies for tools with no parameters.

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 the tool provides real-time quotes ('实时行情') for Shenzhen A-shares ('深 A 股'), specifying the exact market and data type. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like stock_sh_a_spot_em (Shanghai A-shares) and stock_bj_a_spot_em (Beijing).

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 implies use for Shenzhen A-share quotes but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or name sibling tools, so the usage context is only implicit.

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