search

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description still adds real behavioral detail beyond annotations: the return type is pandas.DataFrame (notable since there is no output schema) and it raises InvalidParameterError when limit is negative.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first line, followed by a compact structured parameter/return/raises block. Every line contributes; the docstring style is slightly mechanical but not wasteful.

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 4-parameter search tool with no output schema and rich annotations, the description covers purpose, all parameters, the DataFrame return type, and one error condition. An agent has enough to call it correctly; the main missing piece is routing guidance against sibling discovery tools.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden, and it does: it defines all four params with examples (query 'A股 历史行情', category 'stock', limit as a count cap, documented_only as filtering to documented interfaces). Only syntax/defaults are left to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: '按自然语言检索 AKShare 接口' (natural-language search over AKShare interfaces), which is unambiguous and distinct from sibling data-fetch tools. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate itself from related discovery siblings such as list_categories or interface_info.

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 text is a parameter docstring and gives no when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It never says that this tool is the discovery entry point before calling a data sibling, nor when to prefer list_categories/interface_info. The only implicit hint is the query parameter example.

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