Get Insider Cluster Buys

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description elaborates on the analysis performed: identifies clusters with specific criteria (3+ insiders, 14-day window) and interprets the signal as bullish. No contradictions; adds valuable behavioral detail 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?

Two sentences: first states the core function, second details the criteria and implication. Every sentence adds value; no wasted words. Front-loaded with the main action.

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 simple single parameter and existence of an output schema, the description fully covers the tool's purpose, criteria, and significance. No gaps.

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 single parameter 'ticker' is fully described in the schema with an example. The description does not add any additional semantic meaning or constraints beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 due to 100% schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool detects cluster buying patterns for a company, specifying the trigger condition (3+ distinct insiders within 14 days) and its significance as a bullish signal. This distinctively separates it from sibling tools like get_insider_transactions.

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 provides context on when to use (to identify bullish insider clusters) but does not explicitly state when not to use or suggest alternatives. It implies use for predictive signals, which is clear enough among many insider tools.

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