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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the tool is read-only, what happens if the stock is not dual-listed, or any error conditions. It also does not describe the output structure or how the mapping is presented.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loads the purpose. It efficiently lists data sources without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (dual-listing mapping) and the absence of an output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, the meaning of ah_premium_at_ipo, or how the secondary markets are structured. An agent would need additional context to use it correctly.

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%, and the description does not explain the 'stock_code' parameter format, such as whether it expects a numeric code with leading zeros or a ticker symbol. This leaves the agent without guidance on how to provide a valid input.

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 states a specific purpose: 'Dual-listing cross-market mapping for a stock' and specifies the data sources (ah_stock_mapping, prospectus_details.secondary_markets, ah_premium_at_ipo). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on other aspects like prospectus or comparisons.

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 for dual-listing mapping but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_ab_comparison or get_prospectus. No exclusions or alternative conditions are mentioned.

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