option_current_day_sse

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

Annotations already cover safety (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive). The description adds no behavioral traits such as data freshness, coverage limitations, or error behavior; it merely states the source URL and return type. No contradiction with 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 brief, consisting of a title, source URL, and return type in three lines. It is front-loaded and free of fluff, though it reads more like a stub than a crafted description.

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 no-parameter tool without an output schema, the description provides the essential source and return format, but does not describe the DataFrame contents, data update schedule, or any trading-day caveats. Adequate for a trivial tool but leaves some gaps.

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 there is nothing to explain. The schema is empty with 100% coverage vacuously, and the baseline for 0-param tools 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 clearly identifies the resource: Shanghai Stock Exchange options disclosure for current-day contracts ('上交所期权当日合约'). It distinguishes from sibling tool option_current_day_szse by exchange. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'list', relying on the function name and context.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states the source URL and return type, with no mention of appropriate contexts, exclusions, or comparison to other option data tools.

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