get_sectors

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It mentions 'Returns a stable schema: index, count, items' and explains the normalization of 'NOMUC' alias, adding some context. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what happens on errors, or describe the return structure in detail.

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 three sentences long, front-loading the purpose and usage. Every sentence adds value: the first states purpose, the second gives usage guidance, the third describes the return schema. No wasted words.

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 has only one optional parameter and an output schema (mentioned but not detailed), the description provides adequate context. However, it could briefly explain what 'index, count, items' represent to improve completeness for an agent.

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?

All parameters are documented in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds extra context beyond the schema, such as the normalization of 'NOMUC' to 'NOMU' and the stable return schema structure. This enhances understanding of parameter behavior.

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: 'Get sector performance for the Saudi market.' It identifies the specific resource (sector performance) and action (get), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_market_summary or get_market_movers which deal with broader market data.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when the user asks for sector-level market moves or a sector snapshot,' providing clear context for when to invoke this tool. While it does not list exclusions or alternatives, the guidance is sufficient for a straightforward tool.

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