美股公司概览

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the multi-source data retrieval strategy and fallback mechanism, which is a key behavioral trait. It lists typical output fields, but could benefit from mentioning error handling, rate limits, or refresh behavior.

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 sentences: the first clearly states purpose and outputs, the second details data source choices. Every sentence provides value without redundancy or fluff, making it concise and well-structured.

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 a single required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, outputs, and data source behavior fairly well. It lists key output fields but not exhaustively, and omits details like return format or error handling. Still, it is largely complete for a simple overview 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 description coverage is 100% and the parameter 'symbol' is clearly described with examples. The tool description adds context about data sources but does not enhance parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 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 verb '获取' and the resource '美股公司基本面概览', listing specific outputs like market cap, PE, EPS, dividend yield, etc. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., stock_financials_us, stock_info) by focusing on a broad overview of fundamentals, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 guidance on data source selection with fallback behavior (Alpha Vantage requires API key, falls back to yfinance). It implies when to use this tool for a quick fundamental snapshot but does not explicitly contrast with siblings or specify exclusions.

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