get_dividends

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

The description discloses the return value (dictionary containing dividend history), which is basic behavioral information. However, it lacks details on data coverage, limitations, or error handling, and no annotations are present to supplement.

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 brief and uses a clear Args/Returns structure. Every sentence adds value, with no extraneous information.

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 tool with a single parameter and an output schema (not shown), the description covers the essential details. However, it omits usage differentiation and any caveats, making it less complete than ideal for guiding tool selection.

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?

The description explains the 'symbol' parameter as 'Stock ticker symbol' with examples ('AAPL', 'GOOGL'), adding meaning beyond the bare schema type definition. This helps an agent understand the expected format.

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 'Get dividend history for a stock' clearly identifies the action and resource. It does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools like get_historical_data, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_historical_data or get_financials. The description only states what it does, not when it is the preferred choice.

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