get_estimates

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It describes the output structure and notes the equity-only constraint, but does not mention aspects like read-only nature, rate limits, or authentication requirements. Basic transparency but lacking deeper behavioral context.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every word contributes meaning. No redundant or filler content. Efficiently structured for quick comprehension.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema present), the description covers the essential aspects: what the tool does, what it returns, and its limitations. It could be slightly more explicit about the forward-looking nature of estimates, but 'forward' sufficiently implies future periods. Overall, it provides adequate context for an agent to use the tool 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 already provides 100% coverage of the single parameter with a detailed description. The tool description does not add new information about the parameter; it repeats the schema text. Therefore, the description adds no value beyond the schema, earning a baseline score of 3.

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 the tool retrieves forward analyst estimates and lists specific data returned (earnings/revenue estimates, EPS trend/revisions, growth estimates). It also specifies it is equity-only and returns empty for ETFs, funds, and crypto, which helps distinguish it from sibling tools like get_earnings or get_financials.

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 provides implicit usage context by noting the tool is equity-only and returns empty for non-equity instruments. The symbol parameter description guides users to use 'search' for company names. However, it does not explicitly compare this tool to siblings or state when to prefer alternatives.

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