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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds useful behavior beyond those: results are ordered best match first, and the operation never accrues signal, implying no state or side effects. There is no contradiction.

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?

Two short sentences with the core action front-loaded. The 'pure resolution' clause earns its place by preventing misuse, and there is no filler.

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 an output schema, annotations, and only two parameters, the description covers the essential semantics well. The main gaps are the meaning of limit and explicit routing among the many sibling tools, but these are minor for a simple lookup tool.

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 partially compensates by explaining that q accepts a ticker or company name as free text. However, the limit parameter is left undocumented beyond its schema default, so parameter semantics are incomplete.

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 and resource: resolve free text (ticker or company name) to known Rayana AI symbols, with best match first. It also distinguishes itself from signal-producing siblings by adding 'Pure resolution — never accrues signal.'

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 makes the use case clear: use this tool when you have a ticker or company name and need the canonical symbol. It does not name alternatives explicitly, but the 'never accrues signal' clause warns against using it for signal retrieval.

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