egx_sector_scanner

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it scans all 18 sectors, ranks by momentum, and returns a heatmap and rotation signals, which is useful. However, it does not mention limitations such as data freshness, interpretation of signals, or any potential side effects, leaving some transparency gaps.

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 a compact model: a one-sentence summary followed by structured Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value and the format is easy to parse, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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?

The Returns section explicitly lists the output components ('Weighted market view, sector heatmap, top picks, and rotation signals'), which is helpful given there is no output schema. It does not explain how to interpret rotation signals or any prerequisites, but the tool is a scanner with clear functionality, so the description is nearly complete.

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%, but the description fully compensates by documenting every argument with allowed values and defaults: 'timeframe: One of 5m, 15m, 1h, 4h, 1D, 1W, 1M (default 1D)', 'top_n_sectors: Number of top sectors to show stock picks for (1-18, default 5)', etc. This adds complete meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 it is a 'Sector rotation scanner for EGX' that 'identifies hot/cold sectors and top picks.' It goes on to explain it scans all 18 sectors, ranks by momentum, and surfaces best stocks, which is a specific verb+resource+scope. This distinguishes it from the sibling egx_sector_scan, which likely just scans sectors without momentum ranking or stock picks.

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 implies use when you want sector rotation analysis ('Sector rotation scanner') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like egx_sector_scan or egx_market_overview. There are no exclusions or comparison guidance, so the context is implied rather than explicit.

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