getTipRanksSymbolSummary

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so the bar is lower, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the window defaults to the trailing twelve months and the payload includes buy/hold/sell, analyst-action breakdowns, and price-target accuracy. It omits pagination and rate-limit behavior, keeping it out of the top band.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the default-window note placed last where it is most actionable. No filler sentences.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing the return shape and does so at a useful level (buy/hold/sell, analyst actions, price-target accuracy). Only minor gaps remain, such as response size or pagination, for a 3-parameter read 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: the 'one stock' framing for symbol and the trailing-twelve-month default for the from/to window, which the schema leaves as bare YYYY-MM-DD strings.

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 names a specific verb+resource ('aggregated rollup of all TipRanks ratings on one stock') and scopes it to a single symbol, which cleanly separates it from the analyst-, firm-, and point-in-time-oriented TipRanks siblings. An agent can route to it without opening the schema.

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?

It gives the context of a per-symbol ratings rollup but never states when to prefer it over getTipRanksPointInTimeRatingsBySymbol, getTipRanksAnalystSummary, or getTipRanksFirmSummary. Usage is implied by the scope rather than explicitly routed.

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