Short Trades

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the tool's safety profile is clear. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations, such as market inference logic, data sources (FINRA/NASDAQ, HKEX), and parameter semantics (e.g., last_timestamp as unix seconds). No contradiction with annotations.

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 extremely concise at four sentences, front-loading the core purpose ('Get daily short-sale volume history for HK or US stocks') and then immediately covering key behavioral and parameter details without any superfluous content.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (documenting return values) and comprehensive annotations, the description covers all necessary behavioral and usage context: market scope, symbol inference, parameter details, and data sources. It is fully adequate for an agent to correctly invoke this 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema documents parameters well. The description adds further meaning by explaining that last_timestamp is in unix seconds and can be omitted for latest data, page_size range (1-100) and default (20), and provides a symbol example with suffixes. This enhances the schema's documentation.

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 retrieves 'daily short-sale volume history' for a specific set of markets (HK or US), with a specific resource (short-sale volume) and scope (HK/US), and distinguishes from siblings by focusing on short-sale volume data as opposed to related tools like short_margin or short_positions.

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 description provides clear context for when to use the tool (get short-sale volume history for HK/US stocks), explains market inference from symbol suffix, and mentions data sources. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives among siblings, which would be helpful given the many related tools.

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