get_dividend_calendar

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It reveals it is forward-looking and requires market/date, but omits return format, pagination behavior, and any safety/rate-limit info. Major gaps in behavioral disclosure.

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?

Extremely concise—two sentences. First sentence conveys main purpose, second adds key parameter usage and sibling distinction. No wasted 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?

Tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations. Description gives basic purpose and parameter hints but lacks output details, exhaustive market values, and full parameter coverage. Incomplete for effective use.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'market' (US/HK/...) and 'date' (YYYY-MM-DD format), but does not explain 'count' parameter. Partial coverage, some value but incomplete.

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?

Description clearly states it is an all-market forward dividend/ex-date calendar, using specific verb 'get' and resource 'dividend calendar'. It distinguishes from sibling tool 'get_corporate_actions' by noting that is per-stock historical while this is market-wide forward.

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?

Explicitly differentiates from get_corporate_actions, helping choose between them. Provides context for when to use: for forward dividend dates across markets. Could be improved by contrasting with other calendar tools like get_earnings_calendar.

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