index_option_100etf_min_qvix

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

Annotations already declare the tool as readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive. The description adds a source URL and return type (pandas.DataFrame), but discloses no other behavioral details such as data frequency, period covered, or potential request limits. It does not contradict annotations.

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 short but redundant, repeating the same Chinese phrase for the tool name and the return description. It includes a URL that may be useful but not essential. The structure is functional yet could be more concise by removing duplication.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description identifies the data source (QVIX for 100ETF) and period type (intraday), and specifies the return type as pandas.DataFrame. It does not detail the columns or update frequency, but for a simple data-fetch tool this is minimally 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 tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. There are no parameters to explain, and the description appropriately avoids adding unnecessary parameter details. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 explicitly identifies the resource: Shenzhen 100ETF options volatility index QVIX intraday (深证100ETF 期权波动率指数 QVIX-分时). This distinguishes it from daily QVIX tools by including '分时' and the 'min' in the tool name. However, it lacks an explicit verb (e.g., 'retrieve'), relying on the implicit return statement to convey the action.

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 the many sibling QVIX tools (e.g., index_option_100etf_qvix, index_option_300etf_min_qvix). There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or alternatives.

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