get_fund_top_holding

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits like read-only status, rate limits, or authentication requirements. It only mentions output format.

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 concise with a brief summary sentence and a structured docstring for parameters and returns. No wasted sentences.

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 simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is mostly complete but lacks details on whether the holding is current or historical, and does not specify any limitations.

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 description provides meaning for both parameters beyond the schema: 'symbol' is explained as 'symbol of the fund' and 'output_format' includes a note that 'toon' is optimized for AI. Schema coverage is 0%, so description adds significant value.

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 'Get' and resource 'top holding of a fund from stock market', and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_fund_asset_holding' and 'get_fund_industry_holding' by specifying 'top holding'.

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 explains the parameters and output format but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, such as when to prefer 'get_fund_asset_holding' or 'get_fund_industry_holding'.

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