get_markets_short_ratio

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds value by detailing the default compact summary and the switch to full data with detail=True or filter parameters. No contradictions.

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 thorough but slightly verbose, repeating the summary behavior in two places. However, it is well-structured with paragraphs and a bullet-like parameter list, making it easy to scan. Minor room for tightening.

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?

The description covers default behavior, filter behavior, output structure, parameter meanings, and notes on plan requirements. With an existing output schema and no required params, this is fully complete.

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?

Although the input schema lacks descriptions, the description provides clear semantics for each parameter: s33 (sector code with example values), date formats, detail as boolean controlling output detail. This compensates fully for the schema coverage gap.

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 retrieves the TSE 33-sector short selling ratio, identifies the resource (sector-level data) and distinguishes from the per-stock sibling tool get_markets_short_sale_report. Purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 states when to use (for sector-level short selling trends) and when to use the alternative (per-stock positions via get_markets_short_sale_report). Also describes the behavior with no parameters vs. filters, giving clear usage guidance.

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