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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the data is end-of-day and dividend-adjusted, but it does not mention response format, date range handling, adjustment methodology, or any rate limits. The lack of detail leaves significant behavioral ambiguity for a data retrieval tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no fluff. The description is compact and organized, conveying the core value without unnecessary words.

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 is simple with only 3 params and no output schema, but the description could better clarify the key distinction from getUnadjustedChart and hint at the response structure. It covers the 'what' but not enough of the 'how' or 'where it fits' in the tool ecosystem.

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% for the three parameters (symbol, from, to), so the schema already documents them. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond implying the date range applies to the adjusted chart. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the resource (Dividend-Adjusted Price Chart API) and the data returned (end-of-day price and volume adjusted for dividends). It distinguishes from siblings like getUnadjustedChart by emphasizing dividend adjustments. However, the verb 'Analyze' is slightly misleading since the tool provides data, not analysis.

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 implies use when dividend-adjusted historical data is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like getUnadjustedChart. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned. The context is present but not made actionable.

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