Get Stock Forecasts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read, but says nothing about data freshness, whether forecasts are consensus or individual analysts, coverage, or any rate/auth constraints, so the agent learns little beyond the scope of the return.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; every word contributes to defining the resource retrieved.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the single required param is documented. However, for a no-annotation research tool, the description is thin on sourcing, freshness, and scope of the forecasts, leaving the agent with a minimal picture.

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?

Only one parameter (stock_id) and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds no format or sourcing detail beyond what the schema supplies, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: analyst forecasts and target prices for a stock. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_stock_details and get_historical_data, though it does not explicitly name a contrasting sibling.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus get_stock_details or other research tools, and no prerequisites or exclusions stated. The agent must infer usage from the purpose sentence alone.

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