stock_yjyg_em

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no further behavioral context such as rate limits, authentication needs, or data update frequency; it only repeats the return type and source URL.

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 front-loaded with a title and URL, then Sphinx-style field directives. The URL may be extraneous for an agent, and the structure is not optimized for machine consumption, but it is not bloated.

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?

With no output schema, the description only says it returns a pandas.DataFrame of '业绩预告' without detailing columns or structure. This is minimal but arguably enough for an agent to know it is fetching earnings pre-announcement data, given the low complexity of the tool.

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 compensate. It defines 'date' as the financial report release date, gives concrete example values in quarterly format (20200331, 20200630, etc.), and notes the starting date 20081231. This substantially clarifies the bare string parameter in 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?

The description names the source and dataset ('东方财富-数据中心-年报季报-业绩预告'), which is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like stock_yjkb_em (业绩快报) or stock_yjbb_em (业绩报表). However, it lacks an explicit action verb and does not mention alternative tools, so it falls short of a full 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The description only supplies parameter and return type information.

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