ownership_treasury_tx

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

No annotations exist, so description must carry full burden. It explains it makes 4 API calls and signals management defense, but does not state read-only nature, authentication needs, or rate limits.

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 'desc:', 'when:', 'rule:', 'ref:', and 'Args:' sections, front-loading key information. It is moderately concise but could be slightly tighter.

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 events, 4 API calls), the description covers purpose, usage, rules, references, and parameters. Output schema exists but is not shown; overall adequate for an 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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the 'Args' section explains each parameter's meaning, format, and defaults (e.g., bgn_de default 2 years ago, end_de default today). This adds significant value 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 handles treasury stock events (acquisition decision, disposal decision, trust contract conclusion, termination) and references sibling tools like ownership_treasury and ownership_full_analysis, distinguishing its scope.

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?

It explicitly says 'use only after running ownership_full_analysis when user requests treasury stock event history' and mentions 4 DART API calls, but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use scenarios.

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