Run a prebuilt screen

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces read-only behavior by focusing on 'get' results. It adds useful context beyond annotations: universe default (sp500), the 'full' option, and the fixed result count. No contradiction or missing safety profile for a simple query tool.

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?

Two sentences deliver purpose, usage preference, parameter semantics, and a caveat about result count. No filler, front-loaded with the core action, and efficiently structured.

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?

For a lightweight tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it tells the agent what to expect (ranked stocks), where to get ids, which alternative to prefer, and what the universe parameter does. The fixed result count covers a potential surprise.

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 50% (only screenId described), but the description compensates by explaining the universe options and defaults. It also clarifies that screenId values come from stoquant_list_prebuilt_screens, adding meaning beyond the schema's bare example.

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 and resource: 'Run one curated screen by its id' and 'get the ranked matching stocks.' It clearly distinguishes from stoquant_list_prebuilt_screens (listing) and stoquant_run_screener (custom screening) by emphasizing curated/pre-tuned filters.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Prefer this over stoquant_run_screener for common intents' and 'from stoquant_list_prebuilt_screens' for ids. It also explains the universe parameter default and recommends 'full' for broader coverage, plus notes the fixed result count.

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