Shareholder Detail

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds transparency about the content of trading_details: empty for institutional holders but populated for insider/individual filers, which is a behavioral trait beyond 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?

Two sentences: first states the purpose, second adds a crucial note. No wasted words, front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple with only two parameters and an output schema. The description covers purpose, prerequisite, and a key data condition. No gaps given the context and available structured fields.

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 schema has 100% coverage, but the description adds context by explaining that 'object_id' comes from 'shareholder_top tool', which provides meaning beyond the schema description alone.

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 identifies the tool's action ('Get') and resource ('a single shareholder's holding and trade history'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'shareholder_top' by specifying the prerequisite and the data returned.

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 explicitly states that the tool requires 'object_id from shareholder_top', guiding usage after that tool. It also notes that trading_details is empty for institutional holders, helping the user know when the data is relevant.

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