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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It mentions 'immutable' and 'versioned', implying a read-only historical retrieval. It clearly indicates the behavior of returning historical snapshots when a version is supplied, though it does not explicitly state side effects (e.g., no modifications).

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 concise—two sentences—and front-loads the core purpose. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 adequately explains what the tool returns (ticker lists) and the versioning concept. It lacks an explicit output schema, but for a simple retrieval tool this is acceptable. The context is sufficient for an agent to understand when and how to use it.

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 single parameter 'version' is fully described in both the schema ('Archived roster version; omit for current') and the tool description ('pass a version to see exactly what a basket contained at that time'). The semantics are unambiguous and complete.

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 the tool returns ticker lists (roster) behind sector baskets, with versioning support. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_history and get_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?

The description explains when to pass the version parameter ('to see exactly what a basket contained at that time') and when to omit it ('for current'). It also notes the API key requirement, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, though the purpose is clear enough.

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