get_sentiment_entry_strategies

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

Annotations already mark it as readOnly and idempotent. Description adds that it returns buy signals, risk warnings, and suggested holding periods, and discloses behavior when the backend service is disabled (returns enabled:false). No contradictions.

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?

Description is concise and front-loaded with purpose in multiple languages, followed by usage guidance and dependency note. No filler, though multilingual repetition is slight overhead.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, and dependency. However, no output schema exists, and the description does not describe the return format or structure beyond mentioning components (buy signals, risk warnings, holding period). Lacks details about output for full completeness.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters (code, market). The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: providing sentiment-driven entry timing strategies (buy signals, risk warnings, suggested holding period). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on 'when to buy' based on sentiment, which is unique among the provided sibling tools.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (用戶問「現在該不該買」「進場時機」「什麼時候進場好」) and a dependency (requires sentiment service enabled; returns enabled:false if not). Does not name specific alternative tools but provides clear context for decision-making.

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