美股技术指标

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the need for ALPHA_VANTAGE_API_KEY but does not mention rate limits, error handling, data freshness, or any other behavioral traits. For a tool using an external API, this is insufficient.

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 only two sentences: the first states purpose and examples, the second states configuration requirement. Every sentence is essential, and no unnecessary details are included.

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 5 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description provides overall purpose and the API key requirement. However, it does not describe the return format or pagination, which is a gap for a data retrieval 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%, so baseline is 3. The description lists example indicators (SMA, EMA, etc.), but the indicator parameter already enumerates them. It adds context about the API key setup, providing marginal extra value.

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 '获取美股技术分析指标数据' (get US stock technical analysis indicator data) and lists specific indicators (SMA, EMA, RSI, MACD, BBANDS). It distinguishes from sibling tools like stock_indicators (for Chinese stocks) by specifying US stocks.

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 technical indicators on US stocks but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like stock_prices_us. It mentions the API key requirement but lacks when-not-to-use guidance.

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