获取上海金银基准价

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 identifies the source (SGE) and the type (benchmark), but fails to mention behavioral details such as the historical nature of the data implied by the 'limit' parameter, update frequency, or return characteristics. The tool's safe read-only behavior is not explicitly stated.

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 two short sentences, immediately communicating the core action and resource. There is no redundant information, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 simple price retrieval tool with a rich schema, this description is adequate but not complete. It lacks positioning among the many precious metals sibling tools (e.g., why use this vs. pm_international_prices), and does not clarify the role of the 'limit' parameter in returning historical benchmark prices.

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%, with both 'limit' and 'metal' fully described. The tool description merely mentions gold/silver, adding no new semantics beyond the schema. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema handles parameter explanations.

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 ('获取' - retrieve) and a specific resource: the gold or silver benchmark price published by the Shanghai Gold Exchange. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pm_spot_prices or pm_international_prices, which target different price types or markets.

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 phrase '这是国内贵金属定价的重要参考' implies a use case (domestic precious metals pricing reference), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use. It offers only implicit guidance, with no direct comparison to sibling tools.

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