Book Lightyear Trades

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds behavioral context by stating 'DRY RUN by default' and the requirement for capital_gains_file on sells, which tempers the destructive nature. No contradictions 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and default behavior. Every sentence provides essential information without 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 14 parameters and no output schema, the description is brief and does not explain the overall workflow (e.g., dry run then confirm with plan_handle). While the schema details are thorough, the description could be more complete about prerequisites and process.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the input schema already describes each parameter. The description adds value by specifying that capital_gains_file is required for sells, which is not explicit in the schema property descriptions.

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 verb 'Book' and the resource 'Lightyear stock Buy/Sell trades', distinguishing it from siblings like book_lightyear_distributions and parse_lightyear_statement.

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 key condition: for sells, capital_gains_file is required for FIFO cost basis and recognized gain/loss. It also notes the dry-run default. However, it does not explicitly differentiate when to use this tool versus similar tools like book_lightyear_distributions.

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