get_shareholding_distribution

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It describes the output (number of shareholders and shares at each tier) but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any required permissions, rate limits, or side effects. For a data retrieval tool, the read-only nature is implied but not stated.

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?

Three sentences with no waste: first states the core function, second describes output, third gives a use case. Information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, output, and usage context. Missing details like data source or update frequency are minor but do not severely hinder usability.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameter 'stock_code' is already documented with an example. The description adds the context 'for a given stock' and 'by tier' but does not provide additional semantic detail beyond what the schema offers. 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 the tool queries TDCC shareholding distribution by tier, showing number of shareholders and shares per tier for a given stock. The verb 'Query' and resource 'shareholding distribution' are specific. Sibling tools like get_director_shareholding and get_evoting_info handle different data, so this tool is well-distinguished.

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 explicitly says it is 'Essential for analyzing retail vs institutional ownership structure,' providing a clear usage context. It does not list alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the context is sufficiently clear given the distinct sibling tools.

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