getRatingsSnapshot

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and open-world behavior. Description adds that ratings are based on financial ratios, which is relevant context, but does not detail the specific rating methodology or output structure. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, fairly concise. The first sentence includes a marketing hook ('Quickly assess'), but overall the description is focused without unnecessary repetition.

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?

Despite good annotations and schema coverage, the description lacks detail on the output format: what constitutes a 'rating snapshot'? It mentions 'key financial ratios' but not which ones or how they are combined. Agent cannot infer the return structure, which is critical for tool selection.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters with descriptions (symbol and limit). Description does not add further meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 for high schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool provides a snapshot of financial ratings for stock symbols based on key financial ratios. The name 'getRatingsSnapshot' and the wording distinguish it from historical ratings (getHistoricalRatings) and financial scores (getFinancialScores), establishing a specific purpose.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like getFinancialScores or getRatios. The phrase 'Quickly assess' implies a quick-check scenario but lacks details on prerequisites or when not to use it.

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