egx_sector_scanner

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds parameter details but does not disclose output format or behavior beyond 'identifies hot/cold sectors and top picks.' No contradiction with annotations.

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: one introductory sentence followed by a clear parameter list. No unnecessary words, and the key purpose is front-loaded. Every sentence 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 description provides good parameter details but lacks information about the output format (e.g., what fields are returned). For a tool with no output schema, this is a gap given the complexity of a sector rotation scanner.

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%, but the description fully specifies acceptable values for all four parameters: timeframe options (5m, 15m, 1h, 4h, 1D, 1W, 1M), ranges for top_n_sectors (1-18), top_n_stocks (1-10), and min_stock_score (0-100). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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's purpose: 'Sector rotation scanner for EGX — identifies hot/cold sectors and top picks.' It uses a specific verb (scanner) and resource (EGX sectors), distinguishing it from siblings like top_gainers or egx_sector_scan.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like bollinger_scan or volume_breakout_scanner. Usage is implied through the purpose but lacks when-to-use/when-not-to-use context.

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