decode

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by detailing the output as scores (0-100) for technical, fundamental, and news dimensions, and explains the purpose of non-obvious parameters. The annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, and idempotent hints, so no contradiction. The description enhances transparency without repeating annotation data.

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 concise with four sentences, front-loading the primary purpose and then providing key details and tips. Every sentence is informative and no filler exists.

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 tool's complexity (multi-dimensional analysis, output schema exists), the description adequately covers return values and parameter usage. It could be more complete by explicitly contrasting with sibling tools, but it provides sufficient information for effective use.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description is crucial. It explains the query parameter for news search and the lang parameter for locale scoping, adding practical meaning. The symbol parameter is self-explanatory from context. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 provides a 'full 3-dimensional analysis across multiple timeframes' with technical, fundamental, and news dimensions. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like 'analyze' or 'fundamentals', which may lead to confusion about when to use this tool over others.

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 offers practical tips for using the query and lang parameters to improve news search and localization. However, it does not provide guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives (e.g., for comprehensive analysis vs. specific dimensions), leaving usage context implied rather than explicit.

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