tushare_convert_ticker

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the input may be either Tushare format or a plain number, and that a Tushare-format string is returned, which implies a pure/idempotent conversion. However, it says nothing about error behavior for invalid tickers, case sensitivity, or market-suffix handling.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose in one sentence, followed by a compact Args/Returns block. No wasted text; the only mild redundancy is restating the return type already covered by the output schema.

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 single-parameter conversion utility with an output schema present, the description covers input formats and the returned type adequately. The main remaining gap is the absence of usage context relative to the many sibling tools, but as a standalone converter it is essentially complete.

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% and the single parameter is only typed as string in the schema. The description compensates by explaining the parameter accepts either Tushare format (600519.SH) or a plain number (600519), giving concrete examples that materially add meaning beyond the bare 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 states a specific verb (convert) and resource (stock ticker to Tushare format), which is unambiguous. It is distinguishable from the data-fetching tushare_* siblings as a pure formatting utility, though it doesn't explicitly name or contrast those siblings.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The usage is only implied by the name and the 'Args' note. An agent must infer that this should be called to normalize a ticker before passing it to other Tushare tools.

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