A股分红历史

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

With no annotations, the description only states the core functionality. It does not disclose behavioral traits like default limit, ordering, error handling, or any authentication requirements. It is adequate but not detailed.

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 a single, direct sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the main action. However, it is very brief and could include more context without being verbose.

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?

Without an output schema, the description fails to explain the return format or structure. It mentions data types but not whether results are ordered, paginated, or include fields like date and amount. This is insufficient for an agent to use the tool confidently.

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 description adds value by elaborating on the types of dividend data, but it does not provide additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 historical dividend data for A-share stocks, specifying types like dividends and bonus shares. It distinguishes from sibling tools focused on prices, real-time data, etc., by focusing on dividend history.

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 implies usage for dividend yield analysis but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions or prerequisites. Usage is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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