InsightSentry MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and succeeds by disclosing the complete return data structure (JSON with total_count, data array, dividend fields) and default behavior (current week). Does not mention rate limits or auth, but covers the critical output contract missing from the schema.

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?

Every sentence earns its place, but the structure is dense with a large JSON blob embedded in the text. The information is necessary given the lack of output schema, but readability suffers from the lack of formatting or separation between return structure and usage instructions.

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?

Excellent completeness for a 4-parameter data retrieval tool with no output schema. The description manually documents the complex nested return structure (compensating for missing output_schema), explains defaults, and provides parameter examples, leaving no critical gaps.

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?

While the schema has 100% coverage, the description adds valuable semantic context beyond the schema's technical definitions, such as explaining that 'w' is used to 'look ahead' and providing concrete examples (w=4 for a month out, 'US' for country, 'NASDAQ:AAPL' for code).

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 tool retrieves 'dividend calendar data' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like get_earnings or get_ipos through the explicit 'dividend calendar' focus.

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?

Provides clear context that this is for dividend calendar data with specific time ranges, and explains parameter usage patterns (w=2 for next week, w=4 for month out). Lacks explicit 'when not to use' statements or named alternatives, but the domain is clearly delineated.

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