get_stock_weekly_balance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the output fields (balance, change, ratio) but does not disclose any behavioral traits like data freshness, rate limits, or authentication needs. For a read-only query tool, it is acceptable but minimal.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. It is concise and avoids redundancy. Nearly every sentence adds value, though the second sentence could be merged or omitted.

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?

Without an output schema or annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain return format, date coverage, or any limitations. For a query tool, users need to know what dates are available or how the balance is calculated.

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 100% with both parameters described in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, e.g., it does not clarify the date range or provide examples. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 queries TDCC weekly custody balance for a stock, specifying the data shown (weekly balance, change, issuance ratio). It distinguishes from siblings like get_director_shareholding or get_securities_info by focusing on a specific custody metric.

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 mentions 'Useful for short-term custody movement tracking' which provides a use case but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives or when not to use. Sibling tools are listed but not compared.

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