egx_index_analysis

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

No annotations exist, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, data freshness, error conditions, or performance implications for large limits.

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 short sentence plus an Args section. It is front-loaded and efficiently structured, though the Args section adds minimal formatting.

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?

With 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description omits return format, data freshness, and error handling. It is adequate for basic use but incomplete for nuanced scenarios.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description lists valid values for index and timeframe, and explains limit meaning (number of stocks, max 100). This adds beyond the schema's defaults but does not clarify what 'full indicators' entails.

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 states the action 'analyse' and resource 'EGX index', specifying output as 'constituent performance with full indicators'. This clearly differentiates from sibling EGX tools like egx_market_overview or egx_sector_scan, though 'full indicators' is vague.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among many EGX-related siblings, no comparator or exclusion criteria are provided.

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