股票财务指标

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

Without annotations, the description only indicates '获取' (get) implying read-only, but it doesn't describe data freshness, market coverage limitations, or whether it returns a single value or a set. Behavioral traits are barely disclosed.

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 conveying purpose and market support. No redundant information, front-loaded, and highly efficient.

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?

The description lacks details about the output: what constitutes 'key indicators'? No output schema exists, so the agent has no idea what data shape to expect. Missing return value explanation leaves the tool incomplete for autonomous use.

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%, and both parameters have descriptions. The tool's description adds the market support context ('支持A股、港股、美股市场'), which aligns with the market param. No additional semantic depth beyond 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 it retrieves key financial indicators from reports and supports three markets. However, it does not specify what kinds of indicators (e.g., ratios, margins) which would make it more distinctive.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs. siblings like stock_financial_compare or stock_financials_us. The agent receives no context to differentiate it from similar financial tools.

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