get_value_stock_screen

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

Description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: states cache-only (no API call), plan restrictions, and output includes margin_ratio and margin_date. Annotations already indicate readonly, idempotent, non-destructive; description aligns and adds context.

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 with summary, criteria, usage notes, and parameter list. Slightly lengthy but front-loaded with most important info first. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers all necessary context: parameter semantics, usage guidance, differentiating from siblings, output fields mentioned (margin_ratio, margin_date). Output schema exists, so no need to detail return values further.

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 provides detailed explanations for all 10 parameters, including constraints like EPS<=0 never match for PER, BPS<=0 never match for PBR. Greatly compensates for 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 the tool screens value stocks near 52-week low with high dividend yield and profit-increase forecast, using specific criteria (PER, PBR, yield). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_dividend_yield_ranking and get_valuation_ranking by noting they cover single criteria.

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 tells when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'For a single criterion use get_valuation_ranking / get_dividend_yield_ranking / detect_52w_high_low.' Also mentions REITs are excluded and redirects to get_dividend_yield_ranking for REIT yields.

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