normalize_stock_code

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions normalization but doesn't disclose what transformations occur (e.g., padding, prefix changes), whether it's idempotent, error handling for invalid codes, or performance characteristics. This leaves significant behavioral gaps for a tool that modifies data.

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?

Single sentence, zero waste. Every word contributes directly to the tool's purpose without redundancy or fluff. The structure is front-loaded with the core action and target.

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?

For a data transformation tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the normalization algorithm, provide examples, or clarify how this integrates with sibling tools that might consume normalized codes.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions 'stock code' generically without explaining valid input formats (e.g., '600036', '000001.SZ'), expected output examples, or constraints. This adds minimal value beyond the bare schema.

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 action ('normalize') and target resource ('stock code'), specifying the output format ('Baostock format'). However, it doesn't distinguish itself from sibling 'normalize_index_code' which performs similar normalization for index codes, leaving some ambiguity about when to use each.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions 'Baostock format' but doesn't explain what that means or when normalization is needed versus using raw codes with other tools like 'get_stock_basic_info' or 'get_historical_k_data'.

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