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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety and idempotency are covered. The description adds a non-annotation behavioral trait: the cost (0.3 points per call), which is useful. However, it omits pagination/limit behavior and what 'stats' actually contains.

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?

A single compact sentence listing what is returned plus a cost parenthetical. It is front-loaded and wastes almost nothing, though the grouped phrase 'stats, the coming catalysts, recent events and the largest companies' is slightly dense.

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 tool has 3 params, no output schema, and rich annotations. The description covers what is returned and the cost, but lacks guidance on differentiating from sector siblings and does not explain limit/include behavior; adequate but with clear gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents sector, limit, and include with defaults and bounds. The description adds nothing about parameter semantics; baseline 3 applies when the schema fully carries the parameter burden.

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 the resource (a sector) and enumerates its contents (stats, catalysts, events, largest companies), but 'Get a sector' is essentially a restatement of the name/title. It does not clearly differentiate from siblings like get_sector_calendar, get_sector_events, sectors_stock, or list_sectors.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sector-related siblings. An agent cannot tell from the description why it would call get_sector instead of get_sector_calendar, get_sector_events, or sectors_stock; only the cost hint is provided.

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