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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds useful behavioral context: the 260+ entry glossary scope and the fallback path to 101 explainers when a term is absent.

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?

Two tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by coverage and fallback details. The parenthetical list adds real information without waste.

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?

No output schema, but for a definition-lookup tool the return is self-evident. The description covers source, coverage, and fallback, leaving only minor gaps (no output-format or alternative-tool routing).

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?

Only one parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents it. The description's category examples (MACD, Elliott-wave) illustrate term types but add no format or syntax detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb ("Get ... definition") and resource ("a financial or market term") and identifies the source corpus. It is instantly distinguishable from all siblings, which fetch market data rather than definitions.

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?

Gives clear context for when the tool applies, including that concepts missing from the glossary fall back to 101 explainers. However, it does not name an alternative (e.g. search_closelook) or state when NOT to use it.

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