egx_sector_scanner

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the operational scope (hot/cold sectors, top picks) and parameter ranges, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as output format, data source, or limitations. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 a single succinct sentence followed by a clean, readable args list. Every element serves a purpose; there is no filler or repetition.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and all four parameters comprehensively. It lacks an explicit description of the return value/output structure, which is notable given there is no output schema. However, the read-only annotations and thorough parameter documentation make the tool well-specified for an agent to use.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: timeframe with allowed values (5m, 15m, 1h, 4h, 1D, 1W, 1M), top_n_sectors (1-18), top_n_stocks (1-10), and min_stock_score (0-100). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type/default information.

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?

Description states 'Sector rotation scanner for EGX — identifies hot/cold sectors and top picks,' providing a specific verb ('identifies') and resource (EGX sectors). It clearly conveys the function but does not distinguish from the similarly named sibling 'egx_sector_scan', so it stops short of full clarity.

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 usage context or alternatives are mentioned. The description does not state when to use this tool versus similar siblings like 'egx_sector_scan' or 'egx_market_overview'. The only implied usage comes from the tool's name and opening sentence, which is insufficient.

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