Get Yield Analysis

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read. The description adds the list of metrics but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as default period, time-series structure, or limitations. A 3 is appropriate given annotations cover safety.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. Zero wasted words. Very concise.

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 tool has 8 parameters and no output schema, so the description should clarify what the return value looks like. It lists metrics but doesn't state whether results are time series, what periods are covered by default, or how the yield metrics are calculated. The schema handles filtering parameters, but the output format remains ambiguous.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema thoroughly documents all 8 parameters. The description does not add parameter-specific guidance, but the schema already compensates. Baseline 3 is justified.

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 the verb 'Get' with a specific resource ('yield metrics') and enumerates the exact metrics included. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like profitability ratios or valuation multiples, which cover different metric categories.

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 implies usage by naming the metrics, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like get_enterprise_value or get_valuation_multiples. No exclusions are mentioned, but the context is clear enough for a knowledgeable user.

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