option_sse_minute_sina

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the current-trading-day-only limitation and return type, but much of the temporal limitation is also present in the annotation title, so the additional behavioral disclosure is modest.

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 first sentence is front-loaded with the key purpose and limitation. The Sphinx-style :param:, :return:, and :rtype: lines are somewhat redundant, but the description remains compact for a one-parameter data-retrieval tool.

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 simple read-only retrieval tool with one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, temporal scope, parameter meaning, and return type. The annotations carry the safety profile and there is no output schema, so missing symbol-format guidance is a minor gap rather than a blocking one.

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 compensate for the single symbol parameter. It identifies symbol as the option code, which adds some meaning, but does not provide format examples, required/optional status, or default-value explanation beyond what the schema already shows.

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 resource and scope: minute-level data for a specified SSE option on the current trading day. It also distinguishes itself from historical minute queries by saying historical minute data cannot be retrieved. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from nearby siblings such as option_sse_daily_sina or option_minute_em, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

It gives a clear usage condition and exclusion: use it for current-trading-day minute data, and do not use it for historical minute data. However, it does not name an alternative tool for historical data or explain prerequisites such as how to obtain a valid option symbol.

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