沪深港通北向资金

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool retrieves flow data and mentions three indicator options. It fails to disclose data freshness, rate limits, authentication needs, or whether data is real-time or historical.

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 two concise sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and provides relevant context ('A股重要的风向标') efficiently.

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 tool has only one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what data is retrieved. However, it lacks details on output format or data period, which would be helpful for a complete understanding. Still, for a simple data retrieval tool, it is mostly 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?

Schema coverage is 100% (one parameter with description). The description lists the three possible values for the indicator parameter, but adds no deeper meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not significantly enhance understanding of parameter behavior.

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 northbound capital flow data for Shanghai-Hong Kong and Shenzhen-Hong Kong Stock Connect, including net inflows. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying '北向资金' (northbound funds) as a key market indicator, which is different from general fund flow or sector-specific flows.

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 the tool is used as a market sentiment indicator ('风向标'), but does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives like stock_fund_flow. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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