yfinance_get_fund_data

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world behavior. The description's 'Fetch' is consistent. It adds no additional behavioral context such as potential response sizes, rate limits, or pagination, but the max_rows parameter in the schema partially addresses that.

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, clear sentence that packs the tool's purpose and scope without extraneous detail.

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?

The description covers the core data types exposed by the tool and an output schema exists to define return structure. It lacks explicit usage guidance but is otherwise sufficient for understanding the tool's domain.

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?

All three parameters (symbol, max_rows, sections) have thorough descriptions in the schema, so the description does not need to elaborate. It adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the schema's high coverage.

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 uses a specific verb 'Fetch' and identifies the exact resource: ETF or mutual-fund composition, holdings, exposures, ratings, and operating details. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools focused on analyst data, news, price history, etc.

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?

While the description clearly implies use for fund-related data, it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings such as yfinance_get_holders or yfinance_get_ticker_info. It neither names alternatives nor states exclusions.

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