get_dividend_yield

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states it 'fetches historical data', implying a read-only operation, but does not confirm idempotency, rate limits, or potential data volume. The description is too minimal to provide adequate transparency.

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 efficiently communicates the tool's purpose without redundancy. It could be slightly more detailed (e.g., mentioning optional date range), but it remains front-loaded and well-structured.

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 simple nature of the tool (historical yield fetch) and full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context on return format, differences from sibling tools, and behavioral constraints, leaving some gaps for the agent.

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?

The input schema covers all four parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema—it only reiterates the tool's main action.

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 verb 'Fetches', the resource 'historical dividend yield data', and the scope 'for a given ticker'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_dividend_distributions, which likely returns actual dividend payments rather than yield.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_dividend_distributions for actual distributions, or get_fundamentals_daily_metrics for other metrics). No explicit context or exclusions are given.

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