get_equity_scheme_performance

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns daily data, covers all open-ended equity schemes, and provides latest NAV and returns. However, it does not mention rate limits or authentication needs, but these are likely minimal.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and uses bullet points for categories and metrics without unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description explains the return format (dictionary by equity fund type) and the data included (NAV, returns). It is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's output.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter info, which is appropriate since 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 retrieves daily performance data for open-ended EQUITY mutual fund schemes, listing specific categories and metrics (NAV, returns). It effectively distinguishes itself from siblings that target debt, hybrid, or ELSS schemes.

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 implies use for equity mutual funds but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_elss_scheme_performance or get_hybrid_scheme_performance. No guidance on when not to use it is provided.

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