get_agm_brief

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It describes the output (flags unusual resolutions) but does not mention side effects, data sources, or limitations. The tool appears read-only, but this is not explicit.

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 structured with a summary, bullet points of flags, a contextual quote, and an Args section. While informative, it is somewhat lengthy; the bullet points and quote could be condensed without losing meaning.

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?

The tool has an output schema (not shown but presence noted), so return values are covered. The description explains purpose and flags but lacks usage guidelines and behavioral transparency. For a tool with one parameter, it is fairly complete but could be improved.

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 input schema has one required parameter 'symbol' with no description. The description adds examples (e.g., RELIANCE, ZEEL, ADANIENT) and context (NSE symbol), providing meaning beyond the schema. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description compensates well.

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 it provides an 'AI briefing for upcoming AGM/EGM resolutions from NSE filings' and lists specific flags (e.g., large debt issuance, management salary hikes). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_stock_brief or get_morning_brief, which cover different scopes.

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 use for pre-AGM/EGM analysis by listing scenarios like 'This company is passing a resolution to raise ₹500Cr debt next week.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, though the context is clear.

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