get_index_spot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only that the data is 'real-time' (实时), without saying whether quotes are delayed, how fresh they are, what happens for unknown indices, or any rate-limit considerations for a live-market endpoint.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence identifies the resource and its coverage with zero filler. Appropriate sizing for a zero-argument lookup tool.

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 parameters and an output schema present, the description does not need to explain return values, and the example index list gives a good idea of scope. It is near-complete, lacking only note of whether the response is a fixed set or exhaustive.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so schema description coverage is trivially 100% and there are no parameter semantics for the description to compensate for. Baseline 4 applies.

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 a specific resource — real-time quotes for major indices — and enumerates concrete examples (SSE Composite, SZSE Component, ChiNext, CSI 300, CSI 500). An agent can distinguish this market-data tool from get_kline (candlesticks) or get_fund_flow (money flow) by resource type, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as get_kline for historical or per-stock data. Usage is only inferable from the resource name itself.

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