nse_insider_trading

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It explains what data is returned and parameter behavior (days default 90, max ~365), but does not mention data freshness, rate limits, or any side effects. The note about being free is context but not a behavioral disclosure.

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-structured with a lead sentence, bullet points, and usage examples. The first sentence is front-loaded and the examples are helpful. The marketing comparison to Trendlyne/Screener Pro adds value but is slightly extraneous for tool invocation.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, 1 required), an output schema, and the description's comprehensive examples and output summary, it is complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly. No further details are needed.

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 description provides thorough parameter explanations beyond the schema: symbol examples (RELIANCE, TCS, INFY, HDFCBANK) and days lookback details (default 90, max ~365). Since schema description coverage is 0%, this fully compensates for the 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's purpose: 'NSE insider trading and SAST disclosures for a stock.' It enumerates specific outputs (SEBI-mandated disclosures, buy vs sell counts, sentiment summary, acquirer/seller details) and distinguishes it from other NSE tools in the sibling list.

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 implies usage for retrieving insider trading data for a given symbol, with examples like nse_insider_trading('RELIANCE'). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_insider_signal or promoter_shareholding, and there are no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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