get_financial_data

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral transparency. It does not mention any side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or data scope (e.g., whether it returns all available financial indicators or just those specified).

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 extremely short (one sentence), but it sacrifices completeness for brevity. It does not provide enough context to be useful, falling into under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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 tool with 4 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, how results are paginated, or any dependencies like login requirements, leaving significant gaps for an agent to use it correctly.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds no additional semantic context beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 '获取 CSMAR 财务数据' states the verb 'get' and resource 'CSMAR financial data', giving a general idea of the tool's purpose. However, it does not distinguish this tool from similar siblings like 'get_stock_data' or 'csmar_query', which may retrieve overlapping or different data.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., get_stock_data, csmar_query). There is no information about prerequisites, such as requiring a session from csmar_login, or when not to use it.

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