get_dividends

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the constraint that only native Yahoo tickers are accepted, which is a useful behavioral trait. However, it does not state read-only status, error behavior, or rate limits, and the constraint largely repeats the schema parameter description.

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 two short sentences. The first sentence states the purpose clearly; the second delivers the critical usage constraint. No wasted words, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 one-parameter getter with a full output schema and detailed parameter documentation, the description covers the purpose and the main usage pitfall. It could be slightly more explicit about the read-only nature, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 schema description already provides 100% coverage of the single 'symbol' parameter, including detailed examples and exclusions. The tool description repeats this information without adding new parameter semantics 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 states a specific action ('Get') and a specific resource ('dividend and stock-split history') for a Yahoo symbol, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_quote or get_history. It is unambiguous and immediately tells the agent what the tool does.

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?

It explicitly instructs that the symbol must be a native Yahoo Finance ticker, never an ISIN, WKN, or company name, and directs users to resolve those via the 'search' tool first. This provides clear when-to-use and prerequisite guidance, naming the alternative tool.

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