get_holder_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. However, it merely states 'Get... info' without disclosing whether the operation is read-only, has any side effects, or requires specific permissions. This leaves the agent without crucial context for invoking the 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence. While it avoids verbosity, it lacks any structural elements (e.g., bullet points or sections) that could improve readability for the agent. It is minimally adequate.

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 complexity of the holder_type enum (six options) and the lack of an output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain what each type returns or how to interpret the results, leaving the agent potentially confused about the tool's behavior.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters, including an enum for holder_type. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'holder and ownership information for a stock', making the tool's function unambiguous. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like get_stock_info by focusing specifically on holders and ownership.

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, such as the other financial data tools in the sibling list. It lacks any context about appropriate use cases or conditions for selecting specific holder_type values.

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