get_industry_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so no additional safety disclosure is needed. The description adds value by specifying the returned fields (name, code, change percent, leading stock), which goes beyond the empty input schema. It does not disclose pagination or limits, but for a list endpoint this is acceptable.

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 front-loads the purpose and includes the key return fields. Every word contributes to understanding, with no fluff 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?

Given the low complexity (0 params) and no output schema, the description provides a fairly complete picture of what is returned. It lists the core fields and indicates there are more (etc.), which is sufficient for a simple list tool. However, it could mention ordering or size limits if any, but no strong gaps.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific information, but none is needed since the schema is empty. The description does not introduce any confusion about inputs.

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 returns a list of industry sectors with specific fields (name, code, change percentage, leading stock). It uses a specific verb and resource, but does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools like get_industry_spot or get_industry_constituents, though the 'list' aspect is implied.

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 the tool is used to retrieve the full list of industry sectors and their basic quote data. It provides clear context but does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives among the many sibling tools, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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