get_financial_ratios

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as data freshness, authentication requirements, or side effects. It only states the tool retrieves data, which is implied by the name. For a read-only tool, this is minimally transparent.

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 concise with a clear purpose, Args, Returns, and Examples sections. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the main functionality. No unnecessary words.

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 an output schema exists (Markdown table), the description does not need to detail return values. However, it only vaguely mentions key indicators without listing which ratios. For a tool with many siblings, more specificity about included ratios would improve completeness.

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 input schema has one parameter with no description (0% coverage). The description adds meaningful format guidance: 'add exchange code after the number, format like 300750.SZ'. This compensates for the schema gap, though it could specify allowed exchange codes.

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 retrieves financial ratio data for a specified stock, listing specific categories like profitability and solvency. This verb+resource pair is distinct from siblings like 'get_financial_summary' or 'get_main_financial_data'.

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 provides basic usage with argument format and example, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus its many siblings. Usage is implied by the tool name and description, but no exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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