fetch_dividend_summary

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

Annotations already show readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it collects up to 200 records, returns a dict with specific keys, and aggregates by ticker and month, offering behavioral detail beyond annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences with bulleted return details. Every sentence adds value: purpose, usage, alternatives, and output structure. No redundancy.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, alternatives, return format, and aggregation behavior. Annotations handle safety. Complete for a summary 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty). Baseline is 4; no parameter info needed as there are none.

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's function: 'Analyse dividend income history' and 'breaking them down by ticker and by calendar month.' It distinguishes from sibling 'fetch_paid_out_dividends' by noting raw record pagination, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('identify which holdings generate the most income and to spot monthly income trends') and when not ('For raw dividend records with pagination control, use fetch_paid_out_dividends instead'), providing clear guidance.

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