Idx Get Bandarmology

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It conveys a read-only intent through 'Fetch' and names the external source, but it does not disclose potential errors, rate limits, data recency, or whether authentication is required. This is adequate but not fully 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 a single, front-loaded sentence that lists the tool's outputs without any filler or repetition. Every phrase contributes meaningful information.

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 one clearly documented parameter and an output schema present, the description does not need to explain return values. It names the data source and the specific data categories, which is sufficient for initial selection. The only minor gap is the lack of explicit alternatives, already captured under usage guidelines.

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 100%, and the single 'ticker' parameter is already documented as a 4-letter IDX stock code. The description adds context about what data the tool fetches but does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('Fetch') and a concrete resource: broker summary, institutional accumulation/distribution status, and big player flows. It also specifies the data source (Stockbit API), which clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like idx_get_orderbook or idx_get_keystats.

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 implies when to use the tool, since it enumerates the exact kinds of data returned. However, it offers no explicit alternatives, exclusions, or guidance on when not to use it relative to neighboring tools such as idx_get_insider_activity or idx_stockbit.

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