get_analysis

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It adds valuable context by listing specific output fields (probability estimate, edge assessment, scenarios, etc.) beyond what the output schema provides. However, missing safety disclosure (read-only vs destructive), error conditions (invalid ID, not-completed errors), or rate limiting behavior.

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?

Well-structured with clear separation: purpose statement, content enumeration, and parameter definition. No wasted words. Minor deduction for slightly formal 'Args:' docstring style which is necessary given poor schema coverage but slightly redundant in conversational context.

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?

Appropriate for a single-parameter retrieval tool with an output schema. The description covers the retrieval purpose, parameter meaning, and preview of returned data structure without needing to fully document the return format (handled by output schema). Lacks only error handling documentation for full completeness.

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 has 0% description coverage for the single parameter. The Args section effectively compensates by defining 'analysis_id' as 'Analysis identifier for a completed analysis,' adding the critical constraint that the analysis must be completed. Could improve by indicating where to obtain this ID (e.g., from list_analyses).

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?

Clear verb ('Retrieve') + specific resource ('full structured analysis result') and explicit scope ('completed analysis'). Effectively distinguishes from sibling 'check_analysis_status' (which only checks status) and 'analyze_market' (which creates analyses).

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?

Implies prerequisite via 'completed analysis' constraint, signaling not to use while analysis is running. However, lacks explicit guidance to use 'check_analysis_status' first for incomplete analyses and doesn't state when to prefer 'list_analyses' versus this specific retrieval.

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