get_shareholding

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds useful source context ('NSE filings (quarterly)', 'Yahoo's insider/institution split') and an interpretive note about promoter stake and pledge, but it omits output shape, rate limits, or caveats.

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 two concise sentences with no wasted words. The core resource is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a meaningful interpretive insight about rising promoter stake and pledge rather than padding.

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?

As a simple getter with no output schema, the description is adequate for recognizing the tool's general return content, but it leaves key invocation details unexplained, such as how 'quarters' maps to the parameter and what the exact output fields are.

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. The phrase 'quarterly' hints that 'quarters' may relate to the time span, but it does not clarify the symbol format, what the integer represents, or that the default is 8. This is minimal compensation for the two parameters.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: retrieving a promoter vs. public shareholding trend from NSE filings and Yahoo's insider/institution split. It uses a specific verb and resource, making the tool's function evident, though it does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools like get_fii_dii or get_company_profile.

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 given for when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies the tool is for shareholding analysis, but it does not state conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context on its own.

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