Bonds and sukuk

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real value with the Mofid-only sourcing limit and the note that very short bills produce absurd yields (explaining the min_days default). It doesn't describe result shape or row ordering beyond the schema, keeping it below a 5.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with the resource and followed by the routing rule and unit conventions; no filler or restatement of the title.

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?

For a six-parameter read-only listing tool with no output schema, the definition covers sourcing, units, and a key statistical caveat. Only the returned row structure and pagination behavior are left implicit, a minor gap given limit is documented.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description goes further by defining units the schema omits: prices are Rial per 1,000,000 par, ytm is percent per year, and coupon_rate is a fraction (0.18 = 18%). That meaningfully disambiguates interpretation of sort and filter results beyond the schema text.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('List exchange-traded bonds, sukuk and treasury bills') and previews the returned fields (maturity, coupon, price, yield to maturity), which immediately distinguishes it from the generic search sibling.

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?

It states the alternative and why it doesn't apply: 'Bonds are not in br_search; list them here by group, symbol or yield.' It also names the data source constraint (Mofid only), so an agent knows precisely when this tool is the right call.

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