贵金属综合诊断

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the included data categories and the one-shot composite nature ('一键获取'), but it does not explain how results are combined, whether all metals are always returned, or any latency/error behavior. The trailing '等' adds ambiguity about the exact scope.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the key differentiator ('复合技能') and efficiently lists the main data categories without redundancy or filler.

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 gives a good overview of the tool's main components for a one-parameter composite, but without annotations or an output schema it leaves gaps around return structure, data freshness, and behavior for unsupported inputs. It is viable but not fully complete.

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 input schema already covers the single parameter 'metal' with clear supported values (gold/silver) and a default, so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no extra parameter-level meaning beyond the general mention of '贵金属'.

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 uses a specific verb ('一键获取') and resource ('贵金属的价格走势、ETF持仓、COMEX库存、期现基差等综合诊断数据'), clearly stating it is a composite diagnostic tool. It distinguishes itself from sibling pm_* tools by aggregating multiple data categories in one call.

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 '复合技能' and the enumerated data categories imply it should be used when a broad precious-metals diagnostic snapshot is needed in one call. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over individual pm_* tools or mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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