Get dividend history

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only and idempotent. The description adds valuable behavioral context: amounts are split-adjusted per share, denominated in the listing's currency, and the output includes specific growth and yield metrics. No contradictions with 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 tightly structured: the first sentence states the core function and output, the second adds important data semantics, and the third points to a relevant sibling. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates well by enumerating the key returned fields: trailing dividend and yield, payments per year, CAGR growth, consecutive increase years, yearly totals, and splits. It also clarifies currency and split adjustment, making the tool fully usable.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters. The description reinforces symbol format and mentions yearly totals, which relates to the 'years' parameter, but it does not add substantial meaning beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource: a stock's dividend and split history, with a detailed list of returned metrics. This differentiates it from siblings like market_get_stock_price and market_get_valuation, which cover price and valuation rather than dividend/split data.

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 clear context: it works for any exchange with Yahoo-style symbols, and it explicitly directs users to edgar_get_key_metrics when they need payout ratio inputs like EPS or FCF. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the use case is well scoped.

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