Get Cross-Company Insider Trading

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

The description aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation by using non-mutating verbs (discover, searches, find). It adds context about the tool's behavior (e.g., cluster buying patterns) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations imply. With annotations present, the description contributes moderate value.

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 three sentences, each with clear purpose: first defines action, second contrasts with sibling, third lists filters and use cases. No redundant information, front-loaded with the main idea.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown) and 6 optional parameters; the description covers its core capability (cross-company insider search), mentions result types (cluster buying, large transactions), and is sufficient given the presence of an output schema for return values.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions filtering by insider name, transaction type, or date range, which maps to several parameters, but does not add semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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's purpose: 'Discover insider trading patterns across multiple companies.' It uses a specific verb (Discover) and resource (cross-company), and explicitly distinguishes from sibling get_insiders by noting the single-ticker vs. universe-wide scope.

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 an explicit alternative: 'Unlike get_insiders which shows insider activity for a single ticker...' and suggests use cases like detecting coordinated activity. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or mention any prerequisites.

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