Rank List

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

Annotations indicate read-only, idempotent behavior. The description adds context about key source, market inference, ib_ prefix stripping, and return fields, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 concise and front-loads the primary purpose. However, it could be slightly more structured, e.g., a separate line for usage guidance. Overall, efficient use of 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?

Given the output schema exists, the description covers key behavioral aspects, parameter details, and return structure. It is complete for a ranked list retrieval tool.

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?

All 4 parameters are documented in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds extra meaning: key examples and source, market inference, default size, and need_article false, plus the ib_ prefix handling, which is not in the 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 'Get ranked stock list by leaderboard tab key', specifying the verb, resource, and method. It explains the key parameter source and provides examples, distinguishing it from sibling tools like rank_categories.

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 explains how to obtain the key from rank_categories and how market is inferred or overridden. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use the tool, the context is clear enough for the agent to decide.

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