Get Dividends For Import

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, idempotent safety profile, so the bar for extra behavioral disclosure is lower. The description adds 'historical' and 'formatted for import' as output-context clues, but it does not mention pagination, date-range limits, or data-source-specific behavior.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the operation and its distinguishing output purpose. It contains no filler, no repetition of annotations, and every phrase earns its place.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, this description is nearly sufficient. The main missing element is an explicit pointer to get_dividends to prevent selection confusion.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both required parameters are already documented. The phrase 'specific symbol' essentially restates the symbol parameter and adds no concrete guidance about symbol formats or data-source values.

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 operation: fetching historical dividend data for a specific symbol, explicitly formatted for import. The 'for import' qualifier distinguishes it from the sibling get_dividends, though it never names that alternative.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'for import' and the required symbol/data_source parameters, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over get_dividends or import_transactions, nor does it provide when-not conditions.

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