search_screener_fields

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It accurately describes the tool as a search function with no destructive behavior indicated. It adds context about the catalog size and variants, but doesn't disclose rate limits or authentication needs. However, for a search tool, this is adequate.

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 with no wasted words. First sentence defines the tool, second sentence gives usage and example. It is efficiently structured and front-loaded.

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 no output schema and low complexity, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, context (catalog size, types of fields), and usage. It is complete enough for an agent to understand when and how to use the tool.

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 0% (description does not explicitly describe parameters), but the example uses 'promoter holding' or 'npa' to illustrate the query parameter. The 'type' parameter is not mentioned. The description adds some value beyond the schema by giving an example, but could be improved by explaining both parameters.

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 it searches a catalog of ~1,500 financial metrics with time-period variants, product segments, and regions. It distinguishes from siblings like screen_companies (which builds queries) by explicitly stating it finds field names before building queries.

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 says to use it before building a screen_companies query and provides an example. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the context implies it's for finding field names, which is clear enough.

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