dividendos

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

The description explicitly distinguishes between 'no dividend' and 'no information' in the response, clarifying a potential ambiguity. It also notes that the source is B3 and that the original type is preserved. However, it does not describe error handling or response format details beyond this distinction.

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 and well-organized: a brief summary, a detailed return description, parameter explanations, and a note on response semantics. No redundant information, and each section serves a clear purpose.

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?

The description covers both input parameters and the core behavior, including the crucial distinction between absence of data and absence of information. There is no output schema, but the description provides sufficient context about the return content. Minor gaps like explicit error scenarios or response format details are not critical for usage.

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?

Both parameters are thoroughly explained: ticker includes format, case, and examples; chave_api explains its purpose, when it's dispensable, and how to use the environment variable fallback. This fully covers the input schema.

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 that the tool provides cash dividends from B3-listed companies, including dividend yield. It further elaborates on the output: each dividend with value per share, ex-dividend date, approval date, plus annual summary and trailing twelve-month yield. This is specific and unambiguous.

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?

Parameter usage is well explained: ticker format with examples and reference to listar_empresas, and chave_api with instructions to leave empty for environment variable. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings or mention any prerequisites or limitations beyond parameter handling.

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