avanza_index_constituents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It clearly indicates a read operation (fetch) and the optional quote/spread enrichment, but it does not mention session/auth requirements, rate limits, pagination, or the structure of the returned data. Core behavior is transparent; deeper behavioral context is missing.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action, states the defaults, and adds the use case. There is no filler or redundancy; every phrase contributes meaning.

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?

This tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description needs to explain return values and selector behavior. It neither describes what the returned constituents look like nor clarifies how index_id and index_name interact. An agent could invoke it with defaults but would be guessing about the output and index selection semantics.

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's mention of 'default OMXS30' and 'optional quote/spread enrichment' adds meaning for index_name, include_quotes, and include_spread. However, index_id is not explained at all, and the relationship or precedence between index_id and index_name is absent, so the compensation is incomplete.

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 states a specific action ('Fetch index constituents') and resource, includes the default index (OMXS30), and mentions optional quote/spread enrichment. It is clear and distinct, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like avanza_market_movers or avanza_search_stock.

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 phrase 'for building a liquid scalp universe' implies a use case, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no when-not-to-use conditions, and no mention of related tools. The context is present but shallow.

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