sensex_components

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

With no annotations, the description provides good transparency by listing return data (current price, % change, market cap, top gainers/losers) and stating it returns live prices. It does not mention potential limitations like rate limits or data freshness, but for a data retrieval tool this is acceptable.

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-structured with a summary, return details, Args, and Examples. Every sentence is purposeful and information-dense, with no wasted words.

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 simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, return data, and examples adequately. It could include additional usage notes on data accuracy or refresh frequency, but is otherwise 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?

The parameter index_name has 0% schema coverage, but the description clearly explains its values (nifty50 or sensex) with default and examples, adding meaningful context beyond the schema 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 it retrieves the list of stocks in Nifty 50 or Sensex with live prices, including specific return fields. While it distinguishes from many sibling tools through its name and function, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar tools like nifty_index.

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?

Usage is implied through Args and Examples, specifying valid index names and default. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any when-not-to-use conditions.

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