detect_52w_high_low_range

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description adds that for certain plans it's 'cache-only, no API call' and data only available after 17:15 JST. Also explains that the 'code' parameter bypasses cache. Provides useful context beyond annotations.

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?

Well-structured: one sentence for purpose, then usage guidance, then a bullet-point parameter list. Every sentence is informative with no waste.

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 6 parameters, 2 required, and annotations that cover safety, plus an output schema (not shown), the description adequately explains the tool's behavior, including caching, data availability, and parameter constraints. It is sufficient for correct 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description provides full parameter documentation: date_from/date_to formats, date_from constraint, code behavior, window_sessions/min_prior_sessions references, detail flag meaning. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type/defaults.

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 states 'Scan 52-week high/low breakouts across a date range,' which is a specific verb+resource. It differentiates from the sibling detect_52w_high_low by explicitly saying it's for multi-day queries.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this instead of repeated detect_52w_high_low calls for multi-day queries' and warns against splitting into parallel calls. Also provides data availability time and a constraint on date_from.

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