div_detail

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that preferred stock data is nested within common stock results, explains the reprt_code mapping to quarters, and mentions data source preference (DART provided ratios). It does not cover auth or rate limits but sufficiently outlines 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 well-structured with clear sections: 'desc', 'when', 'rule', 'ref'. It is front-loaded with purpose and usage conditions, and each sentence adds value. No wasted words.

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 complexity (4 params, no schema descriptions, but has output schema), the description covers essential behavioral aspects and provides examples. Missing details on the format and bsns_year parameters, but overall it enables correct invocation.

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%, and the description explains only two of four parameters: ticker (common stock base) and reprt_code (with quarter mappings). The bsns_year and format parameters are not described, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 it provides dividend details for common and preferred stocks, listing specific data points like DPS, payout ratio, etc. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning preferred stock details, but does not explicitly differentiate from similar tools like div_history or div_full_analysis.

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 'when' section explicitly states when to use this tool (for dividend, DPS, dividend rate content) and provides a rule for preferred stock queries. However, it does not provide when-not-to-use scenarios or explicitly contrast with alternatives like div_history.

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