XMLStock: wordstat dynamics

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

The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it states the operation is paid per request, explains that month periods automatically stretch to whole months, and describes the return shape. It does not mention auth prerequisites, rate limits, or error behavior, but the annotations already provide a partial safety profile.

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 dense sentences cover purpose, cost, period options, date constraints, automatic month stretching, and the return format without filler. The information is logically ordered and every clause contributes.

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 paid time-series query with no output schema, the description provides sufficient operational detail: period values, date format, and the returned object shape. It omits explicit instructions about credentials and the meaning of share, but those are partially covered by the account parameter referencing *_auth_status.

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 coverage is 67%, and the description adds some meaning for period behavior and output format. However, it largely repeats the date format and enum values already present in the schema, leaves the query parameter implicit, and does not explain count/share semantics.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: it returns wordstat frequency dynamics over time, distinguishing it from a static wordstat lookup. It names the resource and data source explicitly, though it does not reference sibling tools by name.

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 explains parameter mechanics, such as period values and date ranges, but does not say when to use this tool instead of xmlstock_wordstat or other siblings. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the choice to the agent's inference.

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