Get revenue breakdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the 'Read-only' statement is redundant but consistent. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, such as the requirement for an 'exact' ticker. No contradictions.

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 three short sentences: one for purpose, one for usage guidance, and one for read-only status. No wasted words, and the most critical information is front-loaded.

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 has 3 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, usage context, and safety (read-only). It does not describe output format or pagination behavior, but the limit parameter hints at row count. For a simple filtering tool, this is mostly complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so each parameter is well-documented in the schema. The description does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema, simply mentioning 'revenue breakdown rows' without detailing parameter formats or relationships. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Fetch') and the resource ('revenue breakdown rows for one exact Bullrun ticker'), lists the supported dimensions (segment, geography, product, customer, other), and distinguishes this tool from siblings by focusing on revenue breakdown specifically.

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 explicitly advises using this tool to 'separate cyclical businesses from recurring segments or inspect geographic exposure instead of relying on blended revenue,' providing clear usage context. While it doesn't name alternative tools, the siblings are listed and the description implies when not to use this tool (e.g., for other financial metrics).

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