screener_house_trades

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

No annotations provided. Description states return fields but doesn't disclose behaviors like rate limits, pagination, or read-only nature. Without annotations, description carries burden but only covers what it returns.

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 clear sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope. No unnecessary words.

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?

No output schema, but description lists return fields (ticker, name, date, politician, trade_type, amount). For a simple screener, this is nearly complete. Could mention pagination or ordering, but not critical.

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 for parameters (limit, format) with descriptions. Description adds context about scope (all tickers) but no parameter-level details beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it screens House trades across all tickers and lists the return fields. It distinguishes from sibling `screener_senate_trades` (Senate) and `house_trades_by_ticker` (by specific ticker).

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 explicit when/when-not or alternatives. It implies use for broad screening, but doesn't mention that for specific ticker queries, `house_trades_by_ticker` exists. Sibling list includes it, but no guidance.

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