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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states what data is returned (first-day closing price) but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any side effects, potential errors, or the return format. For a data retrieval tool, this is a significant gap.

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 extremely concise (one sentence) but under-specified. It lacks essential information about usage, parameters, and return values. While brevity is good, this is not appropriately sized because it fails to cover required guidance.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the agent can expect. It does not mention whether the response is a single value, a time series, or the unit of the price. It also lacks any context on when to use this tool among the many stock-related siblings.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the parameter meaning. It does not explain what 'stock_code' is, its format (e.g., ticker symbol, numeric ID), or how it should be provided. The schema only says 'Stock Code' with no further context, leaving the agent to guess.

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 clear purpose: 'First-day closing price for a single stock.' It specifies the resource (single stock) and the data point (first-day closing price), which is specific enough to distinguish from many sibling tools like get_stock_ohlc or get_dual_listing_price, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where a different tool would be appropriate. The description provides no context for selection.

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