egx_sector_scan

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that results are limited to 50 per sector and that leaving sector empty shows all sectors, but it lacks details on data source, freshness, error handling, or side effects, leaving significant gaps.

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 concise and well-structured: a single-sentence purpose followed by a clear 'Args:' section with each parameter explained. No redundant or extraneous content.

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?

Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description covers parameter details and basic purpose. However, it lacks information about the output format, sorting, or how results relate to the sibling 'egx_sector_scanner', leaving some contextual gaps.

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?

All three parameters are explained in the description with examples and constraints (e.g., sector names, timeframe values, limit max). Since the schema had no descriptions (0% coverage), the description effectively compensates by adding meaning beyond the schema.

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 that the tool scans EGX stocks by sector and lists sectors if none specified. However, it does not differentiate from the similarly named sibling 'egx_sector_scanner', leaving the agent unsure which to use.

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 only hints at usage by noting that leaving sector empty lists sectors, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor any when-not-to-use advice.

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