US stock snapshot (free): live quote + financial metrics — P/E, P/S, EPS, margins, ROE, revenue growth, 52-week range, dividend yield, beta (Finnhub, TTM). Educational info, not financial advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | Yes | Ticker, e.g. AAPL, TSLA, NVDA |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions the data source (Finnhub, TTM) and educational intent, and states it's free. However, it does not disclose whether it is read-only, any rate limits, or authentication needs.
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 sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose and key metrics. Every word adds value.
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 no output schema, the description compensates by listing many returned metrics (P/E, P/S, EPS, etc.). It is sufficient for a simple snapshot 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?
Schema coverage is 100% with a single 'symbol' parameter described. The description adds context (ticker examples) but does not significantly expand on the schema's 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?
The description clearly states it provides a 'US stock snapshot' with specific financial metrics (P/E, P/S, EPS, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (owlx_memesniper, owlx_memestats, etc.) which deal with memes and other 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?
The description implies use for US stock quotes and metrics, noting it's free and educational. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context makes it clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct function: meme signal generation, signal stats, stock profile, crypto structure analysis, and token fundamentals. No overlap in purpose.
All tools follow the 'owlx_' prefix with a descriptive compound noun (e.g., owlx_memesniper, owlx_stock_profile), ensuring a predictable pattern.
Five tools is well-scoped for a trading intelligence server, covering multiple asset classes (crypto, stocks) and analysis types without being excessive.
Covers core intelligence needs: signals, stats, profiles, and structure reads. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no forex or bonds), but within the stated domain it's comprehensive.
