get_market_screener

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions the subscription requirement but lacks details on rate limits, response size, pagination, data freshness, or any limits when using 'fetchAll'. Important behavioral context is missing.

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 three sentences long, front-loading the main purpose and key details. Every sentence adds value with no redundant 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?

The tool has no output schema, but the description does not explain the return structure (JSON fields or CSV columns). It also lacks error handling or limit information. Given the complexity (3 params, nested object, fetching all data), it is incomplete.

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%, and the description adds value by recommending CSV for downloadable files. The parameters are well-documented in both schema and description, with the nested filter object clearly explained.

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 tool screens the entire stock market (5,900+ stocks) using CirclFi data, with specific filters and output formats. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'get_stock_valuation' which focuses on individual stock valuation.

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 mentions a required paid subscription and recommends CSV for downloadable files, providing some usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling tool or state when not to use it.

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