stock_threads

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It implies reading but doesn't disclose rate limits, authentication, pagination behavior, or error handling. The limit parameter hints at pagination but isn't explained.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action and resource. No unnecessary words. Efficient and clear.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality. Missing details on return format or pagination, but acceptable for its complexity.

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 50% (ticker has a description, limit does not). The tool description reinforces ticker meaning but adds nothing for limit. With low coverage, description should compensate more.

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 the tool lists threads for an ASX ticker on HotCopper, with explicit examples (PLS, BHP, CU6). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_thread' (single thread) and 'search' (general).

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance, but the purpose is straightforward enough that an agent can infer usage. A brief note on when to prefer sibling tools would elevate this.

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