get_industry_minute_kline

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description is consistent with a read operation. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context such as return format, period semantics beyond the schema, or limitations. It restates the tool's purpose without deeper disclosure.

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 clear sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. It is appropriately sized for its purpose, with no unnecessary words. It lacks additional structure to convey context, but for a simple tool this is acceptable.

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 the lack of an output schema and simple parameters, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the expected return data, any constraints, or how this tool fits with related industry/sector tools. An agent would lack guidance on when to invoke this vs similar tools and what to expect in response.

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%, and both parameters (symbol, period) have descriptive Chinese descriptions, including the enum meaning for period. The description itself adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 '获取行业板块分钟 K 线/分时数据' (Get industry sector minute K-line/time-sharing data) clearly specifies the verb, resource (industry sector), and data type, distinguishing it from siblings like get_industry_kline (daily/weekly) and get_concept_minute_kline (concept sector).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only defines the tool's function without mentioning related tools such as get_industry_kline or get_minute_kline, nor any exclusions or preferred scenarios.

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