analyze_budget_live

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions the tool returns 'instant sector + stock impact mapping' and lists sectors detected, but does not disclose any behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens if used outside the designated date.

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 relatively detailed with an example and a list of detected sectors. It is front-loaded with purpose but could be more concise; some sentences like the example could be shortened.

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 only one parameter and presence of an output schema (as per context), the description covers the use case well, including input format, output concept, and sectors detected. It is sufficient for an agent to understand and invoke the 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 only parameter 'text' has 0% schema description coverage. The description adds a clear semantic explanation: 'Budget speech transcript text (paste directly from live broadcast)', which is more informative than the schema's bare type definition.

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 is a 'Real-time budget speech analyzer' and specifies the use case: on Feb 1st as the FM speaks. It differentiates from siblings like 'get_budget_impact' by emphasizing real-time usage and providing an example of input-output.

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 states when to use ('on Feb 1st as FM speaks') and what input to provide ('Paste the Finance Minister's speech text'). It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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