Industry Valuation Distribution

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

Annotations already declare the tool as readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that it returns a 'distribution' of PE/PB/PS values, which is behavioral context beyond annotations, but does not disclose the format (e.g., histogram, percentiles) or any time scope.

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 single sentence, which is concise but may be overly terse. It states the core purpose without elaboration, which is acceptable but leaves room for ambiguity about the nature of the 'distribution'.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description does not need to detail return values. However, the tool deals with valuation distributions and could benefit from additional context (e.g., whether it returns historical or current data, or how industries are defined). Given moderate complexity and good schema coverage, it is minimally adequate.

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 single parameter 'symbol' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage) with an example. The description adds no additional semantic meaning, so a baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema already handles it.

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 tool retrieves 'industry PE/PB/PS valuation distribution', specifying the exact valuation metrics. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like 'industry_valuation' (likely summary stats) or 'industry_rank', leaving the agent to infer the distinction from the term 'distribution'.

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 versus alternatives such as 'industry_valuation' or 'industry_peers'. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or context-specific scenarios, leaving the agent without decision support.

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