stock_zh_ab_comparison_em

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only and idempotent. The description adds that it returns real-time quotes as a pandas DataFrame, which is useful context beyond the annotations. However, it does not mention other behavioral traits like data freshness, pagination, or specific fields.

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 well-structured: a title line, a source URL, and return type information. Each element serves a purpose without excess verbosity, though it could be slightly more explicit about the data scope.

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 zero-parameter data retrieval tool, the description provides essential context: data source (Eastmoney), market scope (沪深京), data type (AB股比价), and return type (pandas DataFrame). No output schema exists, but the return type is stated clearly.

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 in the schema, so parameter documentation is not needed. The description makes no parameter claims, and the baseline for zero parameters is appropriately 4.

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 tool as retrieving AB-share comparison real-time quotes from Eastmoney's market center, specifying the market scope (沪深京) and data type (AB股比价). It includes a source URL, which adds credential. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'fetch', reading more like a title than a functional statement.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as stock_zh_ah_spot or stock_zh_b_spot. The description only states what it returns, with no context about scenarios or exclusions.

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