get_hybrid_scheme_performance

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. The verb 'Get' and the description of returning data strongly imply a read-only operation. However, it could explicitly state that no modifications occur. The return format is described.

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?

Description is short (two paragraphs), front-loaded with purpose, lists included types, details output metrics, and describes return format. 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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully specifies the tool's scope (open-ended hybrid schemes), examples, metrics (NAV, returns), and return structure (dictionary categorized by fund type). Complete for its simplicity.

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 description does not need to add parameter info. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves daily performance data for hybrid mutual fund schemes, with explicit examples of hybrid types. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_equity_scheme_performance and get_debt_scheme_performance.

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 tool is clearly intended for hybrid funds, as indicated by the name and description. However, no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, though context from sibling tools implies the distinction.

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