get_earnings_calendar

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, data freshness, pagination, or error behavior. It only states the basic function, leaving significant gaps in transparency.

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 very concise: one sentence with a list of market codes. It is front-loaded and wastes no words. However, it could still benefit from brief param explanations without losing conciseness.

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 three parameters, no output schema, and zero annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return format, date constraints, or how max_count affects results. The tool's behavior beyond basic listing is unclear.

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%, yet the description only partially compensates by listing allowed market values. The 'date' and 'max_count' parameters are not explained at all, leaving their purpose and format ambiguous.

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 earnings-release calendars for a market, specifying valid market codes (US/HK/CN/SG/MY/JP). The verb 'Get' and resource 'earnings-release calendar' are specific. While it distinguishes from sibling calendar tools (e.g., dividend, economic) by focusing on earnings, it does not explicitly differentiate itself.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention conditions like date range or currency, nor does it compare with other similar tools (e.g., get_dividend_calendar). Usage context is only implied by the tool name.

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