get_screen_details

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

No annotations are provided, placing full burden on the description. The description only states the basic action and parameters, with no mention of side effects, error behavior, rate limits, or performance characteristics. It does not exceed the minimal functional statement.

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: one sentence and a parameter list. Every line adds value, and the structure is easy to scan. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description appropriately focuses on input parameters. It explains how to use the tool and the origin of key IDs. It does not detail the output structure, but that is covered by the schema. Slightly more context on error handling or pagination could improve completeness.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so effectively by explaining each parameter: screen_id and slug are from list_screens, page defaults to 1, limit has range 1-50 and default 50. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's property names.

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's purpose: executing a stock screen and retrieving matching companies with data. The verb 'Run' and specific resource 'stock screen' make it distinct from siblings like list_screens (which lists screens) or get_company (individual company details).

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 explains that screen_id and slug come from list_screens results, providing clear context for when to use this tool. It also documents default values for page and limit. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or describe prerequisites beyond the parameter origins.

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