Industry

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the data source convention for the key and the fact that the response mixes several curated company lists. It does not discuss failure modes for invalid keys, which is the main remaining gap.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the single most common mistake. The 'not a ticker symbol' warning appears twice (opening line and closing line), which is redundant but defensible as emphasis on a high-frequency misuse.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed further. Key acquisition, format caveat, and limiting behavior are all covered; nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the `key` format and `limit` bound (1-100, default 25) are already documented. The description's key-vs-ticker note largely repeats the schema's own wording rather than adding new semantics.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Browse an industry by its Yahoo key' and it enumerates the payload (overview, parent sector, top companies, top-performing/growth). It also quietly distinguishes itself from the nearby get_sector, so an agent can tell the two apart without opening schemas.

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?

Gives a concrete discovery path (valid keys come from the `industries` list returned by `get_sector`) and an explicit exclusion ('not a ticker symbol'). It lacks a stated when-not/conditional alternative, but the routing guidance is clear.

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