screening_get_maverick_stocks

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It includes a disclaimer but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens if screening data is stale. Minimal behavioral context beyond the strategy criteria.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, but includes a lengthy disclaimer and strategy bullet points. While the disclaimer is important, it could be more concise. Adequate but not optimally structured.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the core purpose and strategy. Lack of annotations is partly mitigated by the description, but could mention prerequisites or data freshness. Overall fairly complete.

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 one parameter described as 'Maximum number of stocks to return (default: 20)'. Description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, so 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?

Description clearly states it retrieves top Maverick stocks from screening results, with specific strategy criteria. It distinguishes from sibling tools like screening_get_maverick_bear_stocks (bearish) and screening_get_all_screening_recommendations (all).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_maverick_stocks or screening_get_screening_by_criteria. The description provides strategy details but lacks when/when-not context.

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