yahoo_finance_sector

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only lists output categories but does not mention that the tool is read-only, any authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects. The description lacks crucial behavioral context for an agent.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the tool's purpose and lists the returned data concisely. No unnecessary words. Every part adds value.

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 tool has only one parameter and low complexity. However, there is no output schema, so the description should provide more detail about the structure of the returned data. Also, it does not guide the agent on how to obtain valid sector keys (e.g., via yahoo_finance_sectors). Completeness is adequate but not comprehensive.

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% (the key parameter is well-described as 'Sector key such as technology'). The description adds little beyond 'for a sector key', which is already clear from the schema. Baseline 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 returns sector detail including overview, top companies, ETFs, etc., for a given sector key. It uses specific verbs and resource names, and the description distinguishes it from sibling tools like yahoo_finance_sectors (list sectors) and yahoo_finance_industry (industry details).

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 usage when one has a sector key and needs sector details, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like yahoo_finance_sectors or yahoo_finance_industry. No guidance on prerequisites or context is provided.

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