google_finance_markets_trending

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits fully. It only says 'Returns normalized trending instruments' without explaining update frequency, data source, what 'normalized' means, or any side effects. Lacks critical context for safe usage.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose and is well-structured for quick parsing.

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 the lack of output schema and low parameter count, the description should compensate with more details about the returned data (e.g., what fields are included, order, limits). It fails to provide enough context for an AI to fully understand what the tool returns.

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?

The only parameter 'limit' has a description in the schema ('Result limit'), covering 100% of parameters. The tool description adds no further explanation or examples, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 returns 'Google Finance trending stocks' and mentions 'normalized trending instruments', which distinguishes it from other Google Finance tools like featured, movers, or top. The purpose is specific and understandable, though the term 'normalized' could be more explicit.

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 on when to use this tool over alternatives such as google_finance_markets_featured, google_finance_markets_movers, or google_finance_markets_top. The description does not provide context about suitable use cases or exclusions.

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