Broker Holding Detail

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, which cover safety and idempotency. The description adds 'full' but does not elaborate on what 'full' entails (e.g., pagination, filtering). With annotations present, the description's minimal extra context is adequate, but it could be more detailed.

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?

A single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the key action and resource. There is no extraneous information, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and annotations present, the description is adequate but minimal. It does not clarify that the detail list is for a specific symbol (implied by the required param) or what fields are included. Domain knowledge is needed.

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?

The input schema has one parameter 'symbol' with a description and example ('700.HK'). Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description's semantic contribution is redundant. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states 'Get full broker holding detail list', which clearly indicates it retrieves detailed broker holdings. The verb 'Get' and noun 'list' specify the action and resource, and it is distinct from sibling tools like 'broker_holding' and 'broker_holding_daily' by implying it returns a detailed list rather than a summary or daily view.

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 context is provided about when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., broker_holding, broker_holding_daily). There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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