get_balance_sheet

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully discloses Yahoo as the data source, approximate coverage (~5 years annual / ~5-6 quarters), and ordering (newest period first), which an agent cannot infer from the schema or annotations.

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 two compact sentences plus a structured param block. Purpose and behavioral context are front-loaded, every sentence adds information, and there is no irrelevant detail.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, equity scope, data source, temporal depth, ordering, and parameter formats. Minor omissions like currency/units are not critical because the output schema provides structural detail.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description compensates by documenting both parameters: symbol with explicitly format examples (RELIANCE, TCS.NS, TCS.BO) and period with its allowed values. The period entry largely repeats the enum, so the added value is strong for symbol but modest for period.

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 ('Get') and resource ('balance sheet for an NSE/BSE-listed Indian equity'), and lists the line items (assets, liabilities, equity, debt, working-capital) that clearly distinguish it from sibling statements like get_income_statement and get_cash_flow_statement.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource and line items, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool vs get_income_statement or get_cash_flow_statement, nor any exclusions. The data-source and period context help, but alternatives are not directly addressed.

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