get_equities_master

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds value by stating it is free, supported plans, and default behavior (returns all stocks for today when no params) without contradicting 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?

The description is well-structured with a clear purpose statement, use case list, parameter details, and plan support info. It is concise yet comprehensive, though slightly longer than minimal.

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 existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers expected return fields (company name, industry code, market segment). Parameter behavior and defaults are fully specified, making the agent well-informed.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description thoroughly explains both parameters: code format (5 digits, 4-digit matches ordinary shares) and date format (YYYYMMDD or YYYY-MM-DD). This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 it returns a listed stock master with company name, industry code, and market segment. It lists specific use cases like ticker lookup and sector code retrieval, distinguishing it from sibling tools that provide price or financial 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 lists explicit use cases (e.g., ticker lookup, sector code) and notes that omitting parameters returns all stocks for today. It also explains code format nuances but does not directly compare with similar sibling tools like search_equities.

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