Veroq

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses critical behavioral traits: COST (5 credits) for resource management and RETURNS structure (symbol, price, change%, RSI, etc.) despite lack of output schema. Does not disclose rate limits or caching behavior, preventing a perfect score.

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?

Uses structured headers (WHEN TO USE, RETURNS, COST, EXAMPLE) for scannability. Zero filler text; every line provides actionable metadata. Example JSON is compact and relevant. Excellent information density.

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 complex 12-parameter screening tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description achieves completeness by documenting return values, credit cost, sibling relationships, and providing a representative usage example. No significant gaps remain for agent invocation.

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 100% coverage establishing baseline 3. Description adds value via EXAMPLE block showing realistic parameter composition (sector + rsi_below + sentiment + limit), demonstrating how filters combine logically. This contextualizes individual parameters beyond isolated schema definitions.

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 'Screen' and clear resource scope 'stocks or crypto', followed by mechanism 'combining technical indicators, sentiment, and fundamental filters'. Explicitly differentiates from sibling 'veroq_screener_presets' by positioning it for custom criteria vs pre-built strategies.

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?

Explicit 'WHEN TO USE' section states exact use case ('find assets matching specific criteria') with concrete examples. Explicitly names sibling alternative 'veroq_screener_presets' for pre-built strategies, creating clear decision boundary between the two tools.

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