market_movers

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, but it only states 'current day'—it does not mention whether this is a read-only operation, how data is sorted, whether it is real-time or delayed, or what the response contains. Significant transparency gaps remain.

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 short sentence, which is under-specification rather than genuine conciseness. It lacks structure or front-loaded key details such as parameter meaning or output behavior, and the brevity does not serve the user effectively.

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?

Although the tool has only one parameter and an output schema exists, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what data is returned, how 'limit' affects results, or how this tool fits with siblings. The description is incomplete for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 schema description coverage is 0% for the only parameter 'limit', and the description does not mention or explain this parameter at all. The agent receives no guidance on what 'limit' controls or its semantics, leaving the schema default as the only hint.

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 'Current day gainers and losers' clearly states the tool's purpose and the specific resource (gainers/losers). It is more specific than the name alone and distinguishes from many siblings by focusing on movers, though it does not explicitly differentiate from market_most_actives or market_snapshot.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like market_most_actives or market_snapshot. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context about typical use cases, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and description.

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