promoter_shareholding

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains outputs (percentages, top holders) but omits behavioral details like data freshness, rate limits, or scope (e.g., works for all NSE stocks?). It adds value by noting free access, but lacks complete transparency.

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 well-organized with bullet points and examples. It front-loads the main purpose and uses concise language, though could be slightly shorter.

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's complexity (ownership breakdown) and presence of output schema, the description sufficiently explains what is returned (percentages, top holders). It is complete for a straightforward data retrieval 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must define the parameter. It clearly defines 'symbol' as NSE stock symbol with examples (e.g., RELIANCE, TCS). This adds meaning beyond the schema's type and title.

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 provides shareholding pattern breakdown (promoter, FII, DII, public) for NSE stocks. It uses specific verbs and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like 'promoter_pledge' and 'nse_quote' by focusing on ownership composition.

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 mentions what data is covered and that it's free, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., when to use 'promoter_shareholding' vs 'company_profile' or 'nse_quote'). No guidance on when not to use or prerequisites.

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