get_taiwan_stock_institutional_flows

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It merely states the basic function without mentioning any constraints, side effects, data format, or pagination. The output schema exists but is not described here.

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?

Single sentence is concise, but at the expense of necessary detail. Could be restructured to include parameter hints or usage context without becoming verbose.

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, zero schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description is insufficient for an agent to correctly invoke the tool. It omits critical context like date range semantics and expected input formats.

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 the description should explain parameter meaning. It does not mention stock_id format, date format, or the role of start_date/end_date. The parameters are completely unexplained.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'institutional investor buy and sell volumes for a Taiwan stock', making purpose obvious. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'analyze_taiwan_stock_institutional_flows', which may have overlapping functionality.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases. Agent must rely only on the tool name and siblings to infer context.

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