screener_get_shareholding_pattern

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

Description adds no behavioral information beyond what annotations already provide (read-only, open-world, idempotent). No mention of data freshness, rate limits, or response format implications.

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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded with purpose. However, it is overly terse, lacking essential details for a 3-parameter tool.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema, the description does not complete the picture. Missing parameter explanations, usage examples, and any indication of the response structure.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain parameters but does not. It implies 'symbol' is needed but fails to clarify 'consolidated' or 'response_format' meaning.

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 indicates the tool retrieves shareholding percentage trends categorized by promoter, FII, DII, government, and public. It differentiates from sibling tools which cover balance sheet, cash flow, etc., by specifically addressing ownership data.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not specify prerequisites or context (e.g., need for symbol, consolidated vs standalone).

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