finstack-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and successfully discloses behavioral traits: it clarifies the tool returns not just dates but also 'analyst estimates (EPS and revenue)', setting accurate expectations for output richness. Does not mention idempotency or side effects, but 'Get' implies safe read operation.

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?

Appropriately compact with clear front-loading of purpose. Uses a docstring-style format (Args, Examples) which is slightly informal but highly scannable. No wasted sentences; the examples efficiently demonstrate usage patterns.

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?

Adequate for a single-parameter tool with an output schema (indicated in context signals). The description appropriately previews the output content (dates + estimates) without needing to fully document the return structure, which the output schema handles. Only gap is the 'required' claim contradicting the schema's optional parameter.

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 0%, requiring the description to compensate. It successfully does so by defining 'symbol' as 'Stock ticker' with concrete examples (RELIANCE, AAPL) and noting it is required, effectively filling the semantic gap left by the bare schema.

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?

Clear specific verb ('Get') + resource ('upcoming earnings dates') + scope ('for a stock'). The 'upcoming' qualifier effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'nse_quarterly_results' (historical) and 'ipo_calendar' (different event type).

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?

Provides implicit usage context by specifying 'upcoming' earnings, hinting this is for future-looking queries. However, lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or differentiation from similar tools like 'nse_quarterly_results' or 'company_profile' that might also contain earnings information.

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