Top 20 Shareholders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds context that results include object_id which can be used with shareholder_detail, and mentions 'across reporting periods', indicating historical data. This goes 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?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences that cover purpose and cross-reference to a sibling tool. No redundant information. Front-loaded with the key action.

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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks explicit mention that the output includes object_id for each shareholder, which would help users understand the drill-down. Still, it is reasonably complete for a simple tool with one parameter.

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% for the single parameter 'symbol', which is well-described in the schema. The description does not add additional semantic information about the parameter beyond what is already in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 that the tool retrieves the top 20 major shareholders (institutions, individuals, insiders) across reporting periods, specifying the verb 'get' and the resource 'top 20 shareholders'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'shareholder_detail' by mentioning the use of object_id for deeper drill-down.

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 guidance on when to use this tool (to get a list of top shareholders) and mentions an alternative: using 'shareholder_detail' with object_id for full trade history. It does not explicitly state when not to use it but implies the scope (summary vs. detail).

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