Search The Balanced Investor Club's coverage universe across stocks, ETFs, and crypto. Type a ticker, company name, or coin name — same as the search box on the website.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Up to 15 results; default 10 | |
| query | Yes | Ticker, name, or coin (e.g. AAPL, Apple, BTC, Tesla) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the 'same as the search box on the website' analogy, but does not disclose specifics like result format or pagination. With annotations present, this is adequate but not rich.
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, no filler. The first sentence immediately explains what the tool does, and the second reinforces usage with a familiar analogy. Every word earns its place.
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?
For a simple search tool with two well-documented parameters and read-only annotations, the description covers the essential purpose and usage context. It does not explain the return format, but absence of an output schema makes that less critical. The 'same as the search box' analogy partially compensates by implying a list of results.
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 schema covers both parameters fully: query has examples (AAPL, Apple, BTC, Tesla) and limit has min/max and default. The description does not add any parameter details, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate given the high schema 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 a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('The Balanced Investor Club's coverage universe'), and explicitly lists the asset types (stocks, ETFs, crypto). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_my_watchlists by scoping to the coverage universe rather than user watchlists.
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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: when you need to find an instrument by ticker, name, or coin. The analogy to the website search box gives a strong hint, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria (e.g., when to use search_my_watchlists instead).
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.
With 57 tools, most have distinct purposes (market data, journaling, watchlists). A few related tools (get_price_alignment vs get_crypto_price_alignment, get_market_pulse vs get_market_movers) could cause miselection, but descriptions clarify asset types and scope.
Tools predominantly use get_/list_/create_/update_/delete_ verbs with clear noun suffixes. Minor deviations like start_here, whoami, add_to_watchlist, and remove_from_watchlist break the pure verb_noun pattern, but the style is consistent and readable.
At 57 tools, the server is far beyond the well-scoped range. While the domain is broad, this many tools will overwhelm an agent's capability to select accurately, and many could be consolidated (e.g., separate financial statements).
The server covers watchlist CRUD, trading journaling, market data (fundamentals, statements, news, transcripts), analysis tools, and community features. No obvious dead ends; lifecycle coverage is thorough for the described domain.
