sentiment_stream

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It adds useful context ('sentiment/news proxy') but fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination, sorting, or error handling. The description is too sparse to inform the agent about side effects or return behavior.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core action and resource. Every word adds value, and it efficiently sets expectations with the 'not price data' caveat.

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 the tool's low complexity (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally viable. It conveys the core purpose but omits details about output format, limit behavior, and data recency. It is complete enough for a simple tool but lacks some contextual richness.

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 100% for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema—only clarifying that posts 'mention' the symbol. It does not elaborate on how 'limit' affects results or how the symbol is matched.

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 retrieves 'Recent community posts mentioning a symbol', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It also distinguishes itself from sibling price-focused tools by explicitly noting 'not price data'.

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 implies usage for sentiment/news analysis and explicitly excludes price data, but it does not name alternative tools or provide explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance. The differentiation is implicit rather than actionable.

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