get_taiwan_stock_margin_trading

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

With no annotations provided, the description should carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it only states what data is retrieved and does not mention any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, data freshness, or whether the operation is read-only.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose with no extraneous words, making it highly concise and front-loaded.

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?

While the description captures the core purpose and an output schema exists, it lacks details on parameter formats, typical usage, or response structure. Given the simplicity of the tool, this might be minimally adequate but not complete.

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%, meaning the schema provides no descriptions for the three parameters. The tool description does not add any parameter-level context beyond what the parameter names imply (e.g., no format for dates).

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'margin-purchase and short-sale balances for a Taiwan stock', which is precise and clearly distinguishes this tool from its sibling tools like 'analyze_taiwan_stock_margin_trading'.

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 is straightforward and implies usage when margin balances are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the analysis sibling, nor does it provide any context about prerequisites or limitations.

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