get_latest_trading_date

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it probes CSI 300, returns a date string, and is safe (read-only). It could add detail on return format consistency, but it's sufficient for a simple tool.

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 concise and well-structured: front-loaded with the main result and format, followed by context on usage and edge cases. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description explains the return format and the tool's behavior comprehensively for a zero-parameter tool. It covers purpose, usage context, and edge case (before market close), making it 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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining the semantics of the output (date format, anchor usage), which is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.

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 clearly states the tool returns the most recent trading date with K-line data published, in YYYY-MM-DD format. It specifies the source (CSI 300) and positions it as a safe anchor date, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_trade_dates.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool: as a safe anchor for follow-up K-line queries, guaranteed to have data regardless of wall-clock time. Also explains when today's bar is not yet published, providing clear guidance on timing.

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