screen_stocks

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

The description provides important behavioral info about raw scaling (e.g., PRICE 10.0, MARKET_CAP 1e10) and references an external schema for config_json. However, it does not disclose output format, side effects, auth needs, or rate limits. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden but falls short.

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 two lines plus parenthetical clarifications. Every sentence adds value, front-loading the purpose and then detailing key parameters.

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 no annotations, the description covers market and config_json but omits page_count and does not describe the output format or return behavior. It is minimally complete but could be more informative.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema for 'market' (listing supported values) and 'config_json' (explaining it is a JSON string with filters/retrieves/sort and raw scaling). However, 'page_count' is not mentioned, and the config_json reference to external schema leaves some vagueness.

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 screens stocks by multi-factor config (V2), with verb 'Screen' and resource 'stocks'. It distinguishes from sibling tools, which are all 'get_' tools for specific data, making this the only screening tool.

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?

While the tool is unique among siblings (no other screening tools), the description does not explicitly state when to use it or provide alternatives. It implies usage for multi-factor screening but lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer it over other tools.

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