stock_zh_b_spot_em

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the return type (pandas.DataFrame) and source URL, but does not disclose rate limits, columns, or other behavioral details. It provides minimal extra value beyond 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 is concise, with only three short lines: purpose, source URL, and return type. It is front-loaded with the essential purpose and contains no filler, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 read-only tool, the description is sufficiently complete: it names the data provider, asset class, and return type. It does not list DataFrame columns, but that is a minor gap given the simplicity of the tool. The URL accidentally points to the A-share board (hs_a_board), which could cause slight confusion but does not invalidate the stated purpose.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema has 100% coverage (nothing to document). The description does not need to add parameter semantics; the baseline of 4 applies because no parameters exist.

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 retrieves real-time B-share quotes from Eastmoney (东方财富网). The name suffix '_em' further distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'stock_zh_b_spot', which is not Eastmoney-specific. The purpose is explicit and unambiguous.

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 clear context of the data source and asset class (B-shares), implying when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state exclusions or alternative tools, such as the difference from stock_zh_b_spot, but the '_em' suffix and clear context are sufficient for a zero-parameter simple tool.

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