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

No annotations are provided, and the description adds behavioral context by noting that WEGE3 is free while other tickers require chave_api. It lists the response contents but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, rate limits, or error behavior. This is adequate for a simple read endpoint but lacks broader behavioral detail.

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 sentences: the first lists the tool's purpose and key output fields, the second covers the free/API-key distinction. No filler or redundant content.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description covers the main purpose, output fields, and a key authentication requirement. It does not mention pagination, historical depth, or error handling, but for a straightforward data retrieval tool this is reasonably complete.

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%, but the description explains the chave_api parameter by stating that only WEGE3 does not require it, and that a free or Pro key is used. The ticker parameter is self-evident from the name and is used in the example 'WEGE3', though its format is not formalized.

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 'Histórico de proventos em dinheiro (dividendos e JCP) de uma empresa da B3' which clearly identifies the tool as returning a history of cash dividends and JCP for a single Brazilian company. It lists specific fields (valor por ação, data de aprovação, data-com, preço) and adds metrics (resumo anual, dividend yield), distinguishing it from siblings like 'multiplos' or 'indicadores_anuais'.

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 provides a usage condition: 'WEGE3 é gratuita; demais tickers exigem chave_api' – indicating when the API key is needed. However, it does not explicitly compare this tool to sibling tools or state when to prefer it over alternatives.

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