tushare_get_weekly_price

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the return content ('Weekly OHLCV data') and the underlying API endpoint, which is useful, but says nothing about auth/token requirements, rate limits, pagination, or default behavior when dates are omitted.

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, then cleanly sectioned into Args and Returns. No filler; every line maps to a parameter or the return value. Minor redundancy between the purpose line and the Args header.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must describe the return, and 'dict: Weekly OHLCV data' is minimal – it names the fields conceptually but not their keys or shape. Combined with no routing guidance among price siblings, it is adequate but incomplete.

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, and it does: it documents all three params with meaning and format, including a concrete ts_code example ('600519.SH') and the YYYYMMDD date format that the bare schema lacks. Only the empty-default semantics of the date params are left unstated.

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 and resource ('Get weekly price data for a stock') and names the exact upstream endpoint (Tushare weekly). The word 'weekly' implicitly separates it from sibling tushare_get_daily_price, but no sibling is named explicitly, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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 tushare_get_daily_price, market_get_stock_history, or tushare_get_realtime_quote. The agent gets no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions to route between the many overlapping price tools.

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