get_sovereign_gold_bonds

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It indicates a read operation returning prices and maturity dates, but does not mention data freshness, pagination, or any side effects. The description is adequate but lacks detail beyond the basic function.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and output.

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 tool is very simple (no parameters, no nested objects). Although there is no output schema, the description mentions the return values (prices and maturity dates) adequately. For this low complexity, the description is sufficiently complete.

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 zero parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter information because there are none. According to the rubric, zero parameters warrant a baseline score of 4.

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 all Sovereign Gold Bonds listed on NSE, including prices and maturity dates. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Sovereign Gold Bonds'), and the result distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_sgb_history (history of a specific bond) and get_sgb_quote (quote for one bond).

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?

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the context of sibling tools (e.g., get_sgb_history, get_sgb_quote) implies this is for a broad overview, while others are for specific bonds or historical data. Usage is implied but not explicitly guided.

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