Get catalysts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds valuable behavioral context: the output is under 'data' with specific fields, and filtering by a ticker may return an empty list if no catalysts exist. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 two sentences, front-loads the output structure, then explains usage and an edge case. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the return format, the two invocation modes, a potential empty result, and the intended use case. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The schema already fully documents the single optional 'ticker' parameter (coverage 100%), and the description essentially restates that. It adds the edge case that the result may be empty for a ticker without catalysts, but this is more about behavior than parameter semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the tool as returning upcoming and recent catalysts with a list of fields, and states the intent 'Use to find date-driven, event-based opportunities.' This is specific and resource-focused, but it does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling tool 'stoquant_get_catalyst_watch', so it does not fully earn a 5.

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 a clear usage context ('Use to find date-driven, event-based opportunities') and explains the market-wide vs. ticker-filtered modes. However, it does not mention when not to use it or reference alternative tools, so it lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives that would merit a 5.

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