Get Richgo curation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Fetch', omitting whether the operation is read-only, what the response contains (e.g., list of stocks, metrics), or any side effects, rate limits, or auth requirements.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the purpose efficiently. No redundant or extraneous 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 description is too vague for a tool with no output schema. It does not specify the return format (e.g., list of tickers, scores), pagination, or any additional context needed for an agent to correctly interpret and use the output.

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% description coverage (one parameter 'key' with a description and default). The description adds example key values, which helps but does not significantly expand on the schema's meaning. 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 states the verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'Richgo curated screener bucket', and provides concrete examples of valid keys (e.g., compound_quality). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like richgo_get_scores or richgo_get_breakout, though it could explicitly contrast with them.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., richgo_get_scores, richgo_get_breakout). The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and examples.

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