screening_get_screening_by_criteria

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as data freshness, authentication requirements, or whether it is a read-only operation. Given the absence of annotations, the description carries the full burden and falls short.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the purpose. It lists categories efficiently. Minor improvement could be a shorter lead-in, but it is well-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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it omits information about result ordering, pagination, or default behavior beyond the limit parameter. It is adequate but not fully context-rich.

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 groups parameters into meaningful categories (momentum, volume, price, sector) that are not fully captured by the individual parameter descriptions. This adds semantic value beyond the schema, which already has 100% coverage.

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 'Get stocks filtered by specific screening criteria', which defines the verb and resource. It lists categories of criteria, distinguishing it from sibling tools that return specific lists (e.g., maverick stocks). However, it could more explicitly contrast with siblings.

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 when custom filtering is needed ('allows custom filtering across all screening results'), but it does not specify when not to use it or mention alternative sibling tools that might be more appropriate for specific screening types.

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