fahali_get_capital_flow

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

Despite no annotations, the description details the return values: net flow USD, institutional vs retail breakdown, whale activity, and flow trend direction. This adds significant context beyond the schema, though it could mention that it is a read-only operation.

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 clear, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. Every sentence adds value: stating the action, listing outputs, and noting access requirement.

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?

Given one required parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, outputs, and a constraint (tier). Minor gap: no mention of output format or pagination, but not critical for such a focused tool.

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 single parameter 'symbol', and the description simply restates 'specific symbol' without adding new semantic meaning. This meets the baseline expectation.

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 'Get capital flow intelligence for a specific symbol', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'fahali_get_contagion_map' by focusing on capital flow rather than contagion, market verdict, or portfolio risk.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only additional information is the tier requirement, which is a prerequisite but not usage direction.

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