get_etf_option_minute

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description merely restates that the tool 'gets' data without adding new behavioral context. It does not disclose any limitations, return format details, or special behavior beyond what the annotation implies, providing no added transparency value.

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, efficient sentence that conveys the core purpose without wordiness. It appropriately front-loads the key information, although it could be expanded slightly with usage context without losing 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 simple single-parameter read-only tool, the description provides the essential purpose. However, with no output schema, it fails to specify what data the response contains (e.g., price points, volume, timestamps), leaving gaps in the user's understanding of what '分钟走势数据' includes.

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 the single parameter 'code' already described as 'ETF 期权合约代码'. The description adds no additional parameter meaning or usage hints, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding of the parameter beyond the schema.

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 ETF 期权合约分钟走势数据' clearly states the action (获取/get) and resource (ETF option contract minute trend data), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_etf_option_daily_kline, relying on the obvious distinction between minute and daily 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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions such as "use get_etf_option_daily_kline for daily data" or "this tool only returns today's minute data."

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