get_warrant_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to restate safety. The only extra behavioral note, 'detail fields are intentionally flexible,' largely repeats what openWorldHint already communicates, and no error, variation, or response semantics are disclosed beyond that.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The sibling distinction and flexibility caveat each earn their place, though 'beyond info' could be more explicit about what 'extended' means.

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?

With one well-documented parameter, safety annotations, and an output schema present, the tool is easy to invoke safely. However, the description does not clarify what 'extended details' include or provide practical guidance on when to choose this over get_warrant_info, leaving a real gap despite the schema richness.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains that order_book_id is the Avanza order-book ID from discovery and not the separate instrumentId. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('warrant details') and distinguishes itself from the sibling get_warrant_info by saying 'beyond info'. However, 'extended ... beyond info' is imprecise about what extra fields or data are actually returned.

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 phrase 'beyond info' implies this tool is for callers needing more than get_warrant_info provides, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement, and no alternative is named. The agent must infer the selection condition.

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