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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It explains the output content (windows, symbols, freshness) but does not explicitly state whether it is safe, read-only, or requires authentication. The 'FREE:' hint adds some behavioral context about cost.

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 a single, compact sentence that front-loads the key feature ('FREE') and clearly specifies the returned information. Every word adds value without unnecessary verbosity.

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 parameterless tool, the description sufficiently explains the return values (extended windows, new symbols, freshness). No output schema exists, so the description must cover what is returned; it does so adequately, though the term 'sections' could be more precise.

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 the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter meanings because there are none; it focuses purely on the return value.

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 returns what the daily refresh changed, with specific details like extended dataset windows, new symbols/sections, and freshness per asset class. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_bars or get_events by focusing on refresh changes.

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 includes 'FREE:' indicating no cost, providing contextual guidance on when to use it. It clearly defines the scope (daily refresh changes), but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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