flow_alerts

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. The word 'raw' and parenthetical 'whale trades' hint at unprocessed, large-trade alerts, but the description does not state ordering, recency, threshold behavior, or how the result set is shaped. This is minimal, though not contradictory.

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 short, front-loaded, and free of filler, but it is more of a title than an operational description. Every word earns its place, yet the brevity crosses into under-specification, so it is adequate but not exemplary.

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?

Although an output schema exists and the domain phrase adds context, the tool has no annotations, 0% parameter coverage, and no usage guidance. For a 3-parameter data-retrieval tool, the description leaves an agent without critical operational 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain ticker, limit, and min_premium. It only mentions 'for a ticker' generically and never describes the limit's effect or the $50,000 min_premium default. An agent cannot infer parameter semantics from the description.

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 identifies the specific resource: raw unusual options flow alerts for a given ticker, and clarifies with 'whale trades.' It lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieves' or 'returns,' but the noun-phrase style is unambiguous and differentiates from siblings such as dark_pool and congress_trades by focusing on ticker-level options flow.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool rather than dark_pool, market_pulse, or conviction_score. The only hint is implicit: use it for ticker-specific unusual options flow, but there are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative routing instructions.

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