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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds the concept of Martingale score scoring and optional filtering, but does not disclose ordering, return format, or other behavioral details. It meets the baseline with annotations but adds limited extra context.

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 two concise sentences with the main purpose front-loaded. Every word adds value, and there is no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 list tool with read-only annotations and a fully documented schema, the description is nearly complete. It explains the core functionality and the optional filter, though it does not describe the shape of the returned list. Given the tool's simplicity, this is sufficient.

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 100%, with both parameters (limit and min_startingale) already documented. The description adds a slight clarification that min_startingale is an optional filter, but does not provide additional meaning beyond what the schema already includes. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific action ('Get') and resource ('top-rated stocks by Martingale score'), distinguishing it from siblings like list_top_crypto. The optional filter is also mentioned, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 the tool is used to retrieve top stocks filtered by Martingale score, which is clear context. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling list and the term 'stocks' sufficiently differentiate it from crypto-related tools.

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