fund_profile_by_slug

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'full fund screening profile' without disclosing return format, error behavior, authorization needs, or any operational details. This is minimal behavioral information.

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 with an example, no waste, and the most critical information is front-loaded. It is appropriately concise for a one-parameter tool.

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 tool with no output schema, no annotations, and only one parameter, the description does not explain what constitutes a 'full' profile, what data it returns, or any relevant operational context. Given the existence of sibling tools for different asset types, the description is insufficient for an agent to confidently select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 provides no description for the 'slug' parameter, and schema coverage is 0%. The tool description compensates by clarifying the parameter is a 'display slug' and provides a realistic example, which adds meaning beyond the schema. However, no further details about slug format or accepted values are given.

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 identifies the tool as returning a 'full fund screening profile' keyed by a 'display slug', with a concrete example. It clearly indicates the resource and identifier type, distinguishing it from sibling tools that use different identifiers, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'retrieve'.

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 fund_profile or fund. The example slug implies the need for a display slug, but there is no explicit statement of prerequisites, exclusions, or comparison to sibling tools.

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