getAnalystEstimates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds minor context (FMP API, projected figures) but does not disclose behaviors beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 sentences: the first states the core action and resource, the second provides examples and purpose. It is efficient and front-loaded, but could be slightly more structured with bullet points for 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?

Given the four parameters with full schema coverage, presence of annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose adequately. It mentions key metrics but does not elaborate on pagination or result structure; however, the schema handles those details.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage for all parameters with descriptions. The description adds no additional semantic meaning or constraints beyond what the schema states; for example, it does not explain the relationship between page/limit and pagination.

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 uses a specific verb 'Retrieve' and clearly identifies the resource 'analyst financial estimates for stock symbols'. It mentions concrete metrics (revenue, EPS) and distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing specifically on analyst estimates versus other 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 provides a general purpose ('to inform your investment decisions') but does not give explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to alternative tools. Among many siblings, no exclusion criteria or recommendations are stated.

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