option_minute_em

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds only that the return is minute-frequency data as a pandas DataFrame; it does not disclose pagination, history limits, or trading-hours coverage.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, but the raw docstring param/type/return tags and a bare URL add noise rather than integrated guidance. It is not bloated but not tightly structured either.

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 single-parameter, read-only quote tool with no output schema, it covers the essentials (what, param source, return type). It lacks detail on time range, frequency granularity, and symbol format that an agent would still have to guess.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load. It does: symbol is labeled as the option code and a source call is named. However it omits format expectations (the schema's default 'MO2404-P-4450' hints at contract format) and the URL example ('151.cu2404P61000') is not tied explicitly to the symbol parameter.

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?

States a specific source, market, and data type: Eastmoney option market minute-frequency quotes. An agent knows it returns intraday minute data for an option contract. It does not distinguish itself from similarly-named siblings like option_sse_minute_sina or option_finance_minute_sina.

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 implies usage (fetch minute data for a given option) and gives a prerequisite — obtain the symbol via ak.option_current_em(). It does not say when to prefer this over other option-minute or daily tools, nor any exclusions.

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