get_dividend_detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds value by enumerating the types of information included (cash dividends, share transfers, ex-rights date, payment date, and '20+ dimensions'), giving the agent a clearer expectation of the return content without contradicting the annotations.

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 concise sentence that packs essential information: the resource, key content dimensions, and a sense of comprehensiveness. No filler or redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming several specific data fields and indicating '20+ dimensions'. This gives a solid sense of what to expect. It doesn't list every field, but it is sufficient for a single-param read-only tool.

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 covers the symbol parameter fully with examples. The tool description does not add extra parameter-level semantics, but since coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description's mention of dimensions is about the return value, not the parameter.

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 stock dividend distribution details and specifies key dimensions (cash dividends, share transfers, ex-rights date, payment date). This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from all sibling tools, none of which mention dividend data.

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 implies usage for retrieving dividend details for a given stock symbol. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but given the sibling tools are all quotes/kline/fund flow tools, the context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool when dividend information is requested.

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