export_us_to_excel

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses storage location, no row limit, and default parameters. However, it does not mention overwrite behavior, directory creation, or error handling.

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?

Description is efficient with examples and argument list, but includes some extraneous Korean phrases and emojis. Structure is clear enough but could be more streamlined.

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 output schema exists, description covers purpose, usage, and parameters well. Lacks details on output format or error cases, but overall adequate for a file export tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so description compensates fully. It lists all 4 arguments with examples, valid values for period and interval, and explains filename auto-generation. This adds essential meaning beyond the schema.

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 exports US stock data to Excel, using specific verb 'export' and resource 'US stock long-term data'. It distinguishes from sibling get_us_chart by mentioning row limit, and provides example queries.

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 explicitly recommends using this tool for backtesting, CSV analysis, or uploading to other AI due to no row limit, contrasting with get_us_chart's 500-row cap. This provides clear when-to-use guidance.

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