Industry Valuation Distribution

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds value by detailing the output fields (min, p25, median, p75, max, current_percentile) and the purpose 'see where the stock sits in its sector', which goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two efficient sentences. The first sentence states the core function, and the second explains the output. No unnecessary words.

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 well-documented parameter, clear annotations, and a detailed output description that compensates for lack of output schema, the description is complete for the tool's simplicity.

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% with a clear description for the 'symbol' parameter. The tool description does not add additional parameter details beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 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?

Clearly states 'Get industry PE/PB/PS valuation distribution' and describes the output structure with percentiles. Distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'industry_valuation' by specifying distribution stats.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the output is explained, there is no mention of when not to use or comparison to siblings like 'industry_peers' or 'industry_rank'.

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