get_fundamentals

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

Description discloses that data is scraped (read-only), indicates amounts in RON, explains null handling for omitted indicators, and aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint=true). Adds value beyond annotations by detailing data source and behavior.

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?

Description is well-structured with bulleted lists and clear sections, but is slightly verbose. Every sentence adds value, but could be trimmed for brevity while maintaining clarity.

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?

Output schema exists and description already covers main data categories, null handling, and data source limitations. No missing essential details for proper tool usage.

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 100% and description provides example tickers (TLV, SNP, ATB) which add helpful context beyond the schema description. Parameter semantics are clear but description does not significantly extend meaning.

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 returns company details and valuation snapshot from the detail page, listing specific data categories like valuation ratios, issue info, and ownership structure. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_candles by noting it provides fundamental data rather than price history.

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 notes that multi-year financial statements are not available and suggests pairing with get_candles for trend context. This provides clear guidance on when to use and what alternatives exist.

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