briefing_stock_auto_fetch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly states the core behavior (toggle daily auto-fetch) and the daily nature is disclosed. However, it does not mention side effects, persistence, or return value, which is a slight gap but not critical for a simple toggle.

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 appropriately sized: the first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides practical usage guidance. It is front-loaded and contains no wasted words, though the second paragraph is somewhat dense.

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 covers purpose and usage triggers well, but it does not mention the return value (no output schema) nor clarify whether the setting is per-user (given the token parameter). This leaves some gaps for a complete understanding.

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%, and the schema already clearly describes both parameters (token and enabled). The description does not add any extra semantic context beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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 states the tool's function: enabling or disabling daily automatic stock news fetching. The verb+resource combination is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like manual fetch (briefing_stock_fetch) and alerts.

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 explicit user utterance examples for when to invoke the tool and also describes a proactive scenario (when the user first adds stocks via watchlist_set). This is strong, concrete guidance with no ambiguity.

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