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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral details beyond the schema: the calculation source (last two daily closes), descending sort order, delayed EOD data, and a non-advice disclaimer.

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?

Three compact sentences. The core listing behavior, sorting, direction, and defaults are front-loaded, followed by the data-latency disclaimer.

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?

For a two-parameter read-only list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It does not describe the returned record shape or result limit, but the essential calling behavior is covered.

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 baseline is 3. However, the description clarifies the calculation behind threshold_pct ('computed from the last two daily closes') and restates direction semantics with the default, adding some meaning beyond the schema descriptions.

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 names a specific action and resource ('List semiconductor stocks') plus the exact selection criterion (absolute daily change at or above a threshold). It is clearly distinguishable from singular-quote or prediction siblings such as get_stock_quote and get_predictions.

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?

It gives clear usage context: the default direction, the default threshold, and that the output is sorted by absolute change. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the scope is unambiguous.

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