get_dividends

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

The description adds the data source context ('Т-Инвестиций') which is valuable beyond the annotations. While the readOnlyHint annotation confirms this is safe to call, the description doesn't elaborate on behavior like what happens when no dividends exist in the date range, pagination limits, or currency formatting in the response.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action and resource. No redundant words or tautology. Appropriate length for a simple data retrieval tool.

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?

Given this is a straightforward read operation with three well-documented parameters and readOnly annotations, the description is sufficient. However, no output schema exists and the description doesn't hint at the return structure (dividend amounts per share, dates, currencies), which would be helpful context.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage (all parameters documented with types, formats, and constraints), the baseline is 3. The description doesn't add additional semantic context beyond the schema (e.g., it doesn't explain that dates default to all-time if omitted), but it doesn't need to given the excellent schema 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 the specific verb 'Получить' (Get/Obtain) with the clear resource 'дивидендные выплаты' (dividend payments) and source 'Т-Инвестиций' (T-Investments). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like get_bond_coupons (bond payments) and get_candles (price data) by specifying dividends specifically.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use get_asset_fundamentals instead), nor does it mention prerequisites like date range requirements or the fact that from/to dates are optional while tickers are required.

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