get_sector

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the return contents (overview, top companies, ETFs, mutual funds, industries) and the drill-down mechanism, implying a read-only operation. It doesn't mention error handling or rate limits, but for a browse tool, this is adequate.

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 yet information-dense. It front-loads the core purpose, then lists return contents, and ends with usage guidance and an example. No wasted sentences.

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 moderate complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, key inputs, outputs, and the relationship to get_industry. It could mention that 'limit' applies to top companies, but this is already in the schema. Overall, sufficient for an agent to select and invoke 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for both parameters. The description adds minimal extra semantic value, mainly reinforcing the key format with examples and reiterating that it is not a ticker. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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's function: 'Browse a market sector by its Yahoo key.' It distinguishes from related tools by emphasizing 'not a ticker symbol' and explicitly referencing the sibling tool 'get_industry' for drilling down into industries.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool: to browse a sector overview, and how to drill down to industries via get_industry. It also clarifies what it is not for ('not a ticker'). It does not explicitly state exclusions among all siblings, but the guidance is strong enough.

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