个股综合诊断

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 only mentions 'composite skill' and 'one-click access', implying a read operation, but does not disclose output format, potential delays, side effects, or any requirements. Minimal behavioral context beyond the name.

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 sentence, front-loaded with '复合技能' (composite skill), and contains no fluff. It is extremely concise and well-structured for the amount of content it provides.

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 tool is a composite diagnostic with potentially complex output, but there is no output schema and no annotations. The description gives only a high-level summary of data categories, not enough for an agent to anticipate the response structure or handle edge cases like unsupported markets. Inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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 schema fully describes both parameters (market with supported values and symbol meaning), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema coverage is complete enough.

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 provides comprehensive diagnostic data covering technical, fundamental, and news aspects, using a specific verb '获取' and resource. It distinguishes itself from single-aspect sibling tools like stock_indicators or stock_news, though it does not explicitly mention individual stock scope beyond the 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies a one-click comprehensive access but does not name any alternatives, state prerequisites, or explain when this should be preferred over calling individual indicator or news tools.

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