get_cni_index_detail

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

No annotations exist, and the description only states the basic read action. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, authorization needs, or data freshness. The output schema exists, but the description should still mention that this is a read-only operation, which is only implied.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. It is appropriately concise for a simple retrieval tool, though a bit more detail could be added without becoming verbose.

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?

Given low complexity, complete schema with 100% coverage, and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral transparency, which are needed for full context. It meets the minimum viable level.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter (symbol, date, output_format).

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 '获取指定指数的成分股样本详情' clearly states the action (get) and resource (constituent stock details of a specified index). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_all_cni_indices' (list all indices) and 'get_cni_index_hist' (historical 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 alternatives, no context for exclusion, and no mention of prerequisites or typical use cases. Usage must be inferred from the tool name alone.

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