calculate_growth_metrics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and handles it well. It discloses the Yahoo ~5-year history limitation, clarifies that the result is at most a 4-year CAGR, and mentions `years_used` to prevent overclaiming the time span.

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 compact and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by the critical data-history caveat and parameter note. Each sentence adds necessary information without filler.

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-value details are unnecessary here. The description covers what is calculated, the data horizon, the symbol format, and the `years_used` behavior, making it complete for a single-parameter tool.

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?

The schema provides zero description for the single `symbol` parameter. The description compensates by defining it as a ticker symbol and giving concrete examples such as 'RELIANCE', 'TCS.NS', and 'TCS.BO', which is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 states a specific verb ('Calculate') and a precise resource: CAGR for revenue, net income, EPS, and free cash flow. It identifies the target market (NSE/BSE-listed Indian equities) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like calculate_financial_ratios by focusing on growth metrics.

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 intended context is clear: use this when the agent needs CAGR growth metrics over an Indian equity's available annual history. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it falls just short of full guidance.

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