data_get_adanos_market_sentiment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully carries the burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only, data freshness, rate limits, or any side effects. The name hints at read-only, but the description adds nothing beyond basic purpose.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks informative structure. It could be improved by front-loading key differentiators or usage tips. It is not overly verbose, but it sacrifices clarity for brevity.

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 complexity (3 parameters, output schema exists, many sibling tools), the description is insufficient. It does not explain what 'Adanos market sentiment' encompasses, how the output is structured, or how this tool fits among alternatives. The description leaves the agent with significant ambiguity.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all three parameters (ticker, days, sources). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Adanos market sentiment data for stocks'), but fails to differentiate from siblings like 'data_get_news_sentiment' or 'research_analyze_market_sentiment'. The term 'optional' is unclear. Purpose is clear at a high level but not uniquely identifying.

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 similar tools (e.g., get_adanos_market_sentiment, data_get_news_sentiment). No when-not or alternative suggestions. The description provides no usage context.

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