yahoo_finance_calendars

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

The description discloses the basic behavior (listing types) but lacks details such as whether the list is static or dynamic, or if any prerequisites exist. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden but only partially meets it.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. Every word is meaningful, with no redundancy.

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 that the tool has no parameters, no output schema, and performs a simple listing, the description is nearly complete. It could mention that the output is a list of calendar type labels/identifiers, but it is sufficient for understanding the tool's basic function.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter information, so the baseline is 4. It correctly implies that no input is needed.

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 that the tool lists global Yahoo Finance calendar types supported by the integration. It uses specific verbs ('Lists') and identifies the resource ('calendar types'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like yahoo_finance_calendar_results which likely retrieves actual calendar events.

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 that the tool is used to discover available calendar types, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like yahoo_finance_calendar_results. No exclusions or alternative suggestions are provided.

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