detect_consecutive_dividend_increase

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

Annotations already show readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description adds that results are 'cache-only, no API call' and explains the as_of_date parameter enables 'lookahead-free back-testing'. Also notes returns include split-adjusted dividend and history list. Adds value 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?

Structured with Args and Returns sections; front-loaded with main purpose and usage notes. Sentences are informative without fluff. Could be slightly more compact (e.g., combine supported plans line), but it's well-organized.

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?

Explains input parameters, cache-only behavior, lookahead-free feature, and return fields (sorted, split-adjusted, history list). Output schema exists and description adds explanation. Could specify what 'history list' contains in more detail, but overall covers key aspects for a screening tool.

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 description fully explains both parameters: min_years as 'minimum number of consecutive years of dividend increase (default 10)' and as_of_date as 'cut-off date for disclosures... enabling lookahead-free back-testing. Defaults to all available data.' Provides format and semantics not present in schema.

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?

Clearly states it screens for stocks with consecutive annual dividend increases, specifying the resource ('stocks with consecutive annual dividend increases') and action ('screen for...'). Also gives Japanese terms ('連続増配') and mentions 'All plans'. Differentiates from siblings that detect price patterns or retrieve 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?

Explicitly says 'Use for 連続増配・dividend growth・増配継続 queries.' Provides caution: 'consecutive dividend growth alone does NOT guarantee outperformance' and suggests combining with yield/payout ratio filters. Does not list alternative tools or state when not to use, but context is clear.

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