Veroq

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses 'COST: 1 credit' (rate limit info) and describes return structure 'Top gainers (symbol, price, change%)...' since no output schema exists. Could explicitly state idempotency/cache behavior, but covers cost and return format well.

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 section headers (WHEN TO USE, RETURNS, COST, EXAMPLE). First sentence establishes purpose immediately. No redundant text; every line adds distinct value beyond the structured fields.

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 adequately compensates by detailing return values (symbols, prices, change percentages) and cost structure. Sufficient for a simple read-only data retrieval tool of low complexity.

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. Description confirms this with 'No parameters needed' and provides 'EXAMPLE: {}' to reinforce empty input expectation. Baseline 4 met with explicit confirmation.

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?

Opens with specific verb 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource as 'today's top market movers,' explicitly listing the three categories (gainers, losers, most actively traded). This distinguishes it from siblings like veroq_market_summary or veroq_trending by focusing specifically on intraday price movement magnitude.

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?

Includes explicit 'WHEN TO USE' section stating 'For a quick snapshot of what's moving the market today' and notes 'No parameters needed.' While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools for deeper analysis, the zero-parameter guidance and contextual trigger provide clear selection criteria.

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