get_concept_minute_kline

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint: true, so the read-only nature is already known. The description adds the minute/intraday scoping but no further behavioral details such as return format, time coverage, or rate limits. With annotations covering safety, a neutral score is appropriate.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the essential purpose without redundant details. Every word contributes meaning, making it highly concise.

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 simple and read-only, with no output schema. The description, combined with the schema and annotations, sufficiently explains what the tool does for a straightforward data retrieval. Some details like return layout or historical depth are absent, but the overall context is adequate.

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 fully describes both parameters (symbol and period) with enums and descriptions. The description adds minimal information beyond schema, so it does not meaningfully enhance parameter understanding. Baseline 3 is applied due to high schema coverage.

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') and resource ('概念板块分钟 K 线/分时数据'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_industry_minute_kline and get_minute_kline. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 implies use for concept sector minute data, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_concept_kline (daily) or get_industry_minute_kline, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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