get_bonds

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions a usage condition but does not describe whether the operation is read-only, what data is returned (beyond 'list of bonds'), or any side effects. For a data retrieval tool, more transparency about output format or limitations is expected.

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 two concise sentences, front-loading the main purpose and adding a critical usage constraint. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 has only one parameter and an output schema exists, the description covers the essential context (what it does, when to use it). It does not explain the output format, but that is handled by the output schema. Minor gap: could mention what bond fields are returned, but overall adequate.

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 the parameter description in the schema already includes the symbol format. The tool description reinforces this with examples, but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves a list of bonds for a public corporate company. It uses a specific verb+resource ('Get the list of bonds') and provides a condition that distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_financials_overview or get_symbol_profile, which cover broader financial data.

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 states that the tool only works for stocks that have issued debt/bonds, with examples. This gives clear context on when to use it, though it does not explicitly exclude cases or suggest alternative tools for non-bond-issuing stocks.

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