get_operation_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention data source, update frequency, or whether the operation is read-only. While it implies data retrieval, the lack of any side-effect or safety information makes it less transparent.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the main purpose. It avoids unnecessary words and clearly lists the fields. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating parameter info.

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 three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the meaning of the fields (e.g., NRTurnRatio), the format for year/quarter, or what 'code' refers to (stock code). This leaves the agent with insufficient context to use the 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 description does not explain the parameters (code, year, quarter) beyond noting quarter range '1..4'. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but fails to provide meaning for the required 'code' parameter or the format of 'year' and 'quarter'.

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 states the tool is for 'Quarterly operating capability' and lists specific fields like NRTurnRatio, which distinguishes it from siblings like get_balance_data or get_profit_data. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from all siblings, leaving some ambiguity.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description implies usage for operating capability metrics, but does not provide context like 'use this for efficiency ratios' or exclude other tools. Sibling tools cover different financial data, but this is not stated.

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