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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination via 'Follow pagination.total', case-insensitive market, and dynamic product counts, but it omits auth requirements, rate limits, and the overall return shape. Adequate but incomplete for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and uses three concise sentences. 'Product counts change over time' is a minor caveat that earns its place; the formatting is slightly awkward but not wasteful.

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 4-parameter read-only discovery tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers invocation essentials: usage context, pagination behavior, case-insensitivity, and symbol format examples. Auth and rate-limit details are missing but likely non-critical for this 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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by noting that 'market is case-insensitive' and by giving a concrete symbol format example for type=futures, which helps interpret the type and market parameters.

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 ('Query') and resource ('supported trading symbols with pagination'), and its role ('discover and verify codes before other calls') clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that fetch data for already-known symbols.

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?

It explicitly says to use this tool before other calls and gives a concrete example for futures ('Query CN or HK with type=futures for futures, e.g. BU2609 or HSI8888'). No when-not or alternative tools are named, but the context is clear.

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