查询当前日期时间：获取今天的日期、时间、星期几、节日

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions retrieving date, time, day of week, and holiday, but doesn't specify behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only (implied by '查询' meaning query), real-time accuracy, data sources, rate limits, or error handling. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It avoids unnecessary words and directly states what the tool does, making it appropriately sized for a simple query tool. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating key output elements for clarity.

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's low complexity (0 parameters, output schema exists), the description is minimally complete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavioral aspects like timezone handling or holiday data sources. With an output schema, it doesn't need to explain return values, but the absence of annotations means more context would be beneficial for full transparency.

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 has 0 parameters, with schema description coverage at 100%. Since there are no parameters, the description doesn't need to add semantic details beyond the schema. It appropriately focuses on the tool's output, meeting the baseline for zero parameters without compensation needed.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks explicit context, exclusions, or references to sibling tools, which include various financial and market data tools but no obvious date/time alternatives. Usage is implied only by the purpose statement, with no further instructions.

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