get_czce_daily

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the source URL and return type (pandas.DataFrame), but does not disclose rate limits, authentication, or other behavioral context; with annotations present, a 3 is reasonable.

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 definition is short and front-loads the exchange, frequency, and data type before parameter details. The Sphinx-style fields and source URL are somewhat extraneous, but overall it is compact and readable.

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 one-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return type (pandas.DataFrame) and a date constraint. However, it does not describe what the volume-price records contain (columns, contract coverage, etc.), and its return line merely repeats the title, leaving the caller with limited output context.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the parameter. It gives acceptable date formats and a minimum-date constraint, but its stated default (当前交易日) conflicts with the schema default (20050525), and that default is also below the stated minimum of 20100824. This inconsistency can mislead the caller.

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 names the data source (郑州商品交易所), frequency (日频率), and data type (量价数据), which lets an agent distinguish this from other exchange-daily tools such as get_gfex_daily or get_dce_daily. It does not state an explicit verb or sibling alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

It provides a date format and a minimum-date constraint, but no guidance on when to use this tool versus its many siblings (e.g., get_futures_daily, get_shfe_daily). There are no when/when-not statements or alternatives.

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