screen_stocks

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. 'Screen' suggests a read-only query, but it does not disclose if results are limited, paginated, or sorted. No mention of side effects or permissions; insufficient for a 'screen' operation.

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?

A single, concise sentence of 8 words. Every word adds value; the action and criteria are front-loaded. 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 no output schema and four parameters, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., a list of matching stocks). It omits scope, ordering, and result count, making it incomplete for a screening 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?

The description adds meaning to parameters by naming them as filters (price, volume, sector), which the schema lacks (0% coverage). However, it does not explain parameter interactions (e.g., min_price vs max_price range) or default behavior.

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 action and resource: 'Screen stocks'. It specifies filters (price, volume, sector) which distinguishes it from siblings like get_stock_quote (single stock) and screen_by_fundamentals (different criteria).

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 filtering by criteria but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives like search_stocks or screen_by_fundamentals. Context is clear but lacks exclusions or when not to use.

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