Screener User Strategies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so safety is clear. The description adds value by detailing the return structure (fields like id, name, description, market, three_months_chg, risk) and the default market behavior.

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 three concise sentences with no fluff: purpose, parameter definition, and return structure with cross-reference to related tools. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers the return fields and relationships, but could optionally mention pagination or limits, though not strictly necessary given the tool's simplicity and existing structured data.

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 one parameter (market) is fully described in the schema with 100% coverage. The description essentially repeats the schema's enum and default, adding no new meaning, so 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 clearly states 'List the current user's saved screener strategies' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this tool from siblings by mentioning how to use the returned id with screener_search and screener_strategy.

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 provides clear context for use: listing saved strategies. It mentions related tools (screener_search, screener_strategy) for running or inspecting, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, though the alternatives are implied.

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