stock_zh_b_daily

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description adds useful behavioral context: the Sina Finance source URL, IP-ban risk under heavy scraping, and pandas DataFrame return type. No contradiction with 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 is structured and front-loads the core purpose plus warning, but the first sentence exactly duplicates the annotation title. The :type lines repeat schema type information, and the URL adds useful source context but also length.

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 read-only historical data fetch with four parameters, the description covers inputs, defaults, and adjustment semantics. However, without an output schema, it only promises 'specific data' as a DataFrame and does not describe expected columns, date range behavior, or error conditions.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the docstring compensates by documenting all four parameters: date format '20201103', symbol example, and detailed adjust modes (qfq, hfq, factors). Minor inconsistency: the example symbol sh600000 is an A-share code, while the schema default sh900901 is the B-share format.

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 opens with '新浪财经-B 股-个股的历史行情数据', clearly identifying the resource as Sina Finance B-share historical quotes for individual stocks. It lacks an explicit verb like 'fetch/query' but the noun phrase plus tool name makes the purpose clear; the 'daily' distinction from B-share spot/minute siblings is implicit.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as stock_zh_b_spot or stock_zh_b_minute. The only usage-related note is '大量抓取容易封 IP', a rate-limit warning, which is not a selection guideline.

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