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

The description discloses that uncredentialed calls return a 402 payment envelope and explains the cost and payment options. This provides clear transparency about the tool's behavior, including its requirement for credentials or payment.

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, information-dense sentence that includes cost, credentials, and endpoint details without being overly verbose. It is well-structured despite the parentheses, maintaining conciseness.

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?

The description does not specify what the signal data contains or its format, and there is no output schema. It only names the tool as a 'radar signal,' leaving the expected response ambiguous. A user would need additional information to understand the tool's full context.

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 schema defines no parameters, and the description only mentions that query parameters exist, referring users to the 'instruments' tool for details. This lacks explicit parameter semantics, leaving the user without concrete information about what parameters can be passed.

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 that the tool provides a pre-IPO/new-listing radar signal, which is specific enough to distinguish it from other signal tools. It also mentions it is a paid tool, adding clarity about its nature.

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 notes the paid nature and directs users to the 'instruments' tool for parameter documentation, giving some usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly compare when to use this tool over other signal tools, though the pre-IPO focus is implied.

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