get_corporate_actions

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

No annotations provided; description only mentions the types of corporate actions but fails to disclose whether the operation is read-only, any side effects, rate limits, or response structure. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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?

Two sentences plus an example. No superfluous content. Front-loaded with 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?

Simple tool with one parameter, but no output schema means the description should hint at return format. It lists types of corporate actions but not the fields or structure. Adequate for basic use.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage; the description adds context that 'symbol' is a stock symbol and shows an example. However, it does not clarify symbol format (e.g., exchange suffix) or constraints.

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 the tool retrieves corporate actions (dividends, splits, bonus) for a stock, and provides a concrete example. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_stock_history or get_stock_quote.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., when to use get_stock_history instead). No context on prerequisites or limitations.

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