nse_circuit_breakers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the tool is a scanner (read-only) and specifies the Nifty 500 universe, adding behavioral context. It doesn't mention rate limits or auth, but for a market data tool this is acceptable.

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-organized with a summary line, a detailed explanation, and examples. Every sentence adds value; there is no fluff or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 one parameter and an output schema, so return values are covered externally. The description covers what it does, the scope (Nifty 500), valid parameter values, and examples. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 only lists a parameter with a default, but the description defines all valid values ('upper', 'lower', 'both') with explicit meanings and examples. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage and adds essential semantic meaning beyond the structured schema.

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 'Scan NSE stocks currently hitting upper or lower circuit limits' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling market tools by focusing on circuit-locked stocks, not just any movers or quotes.

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 gives clear context: it checks Nifty 500 stocks for stocks frozen at intraday high or low. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is well-defined. Examples illustrate intended usage.

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