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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description discloses meaningful limitations: 'Read-only public research data. No account access, no order placement or fund transfers. Not investment advice.' It also notes partial misses are OK, which is critical behavioral context for batch calls. No contradictions with annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by targeted routing guidance and necessary safety disclaimers. Every clause earns its place with 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 the tool's moderate complexity (5 params, 1 required), the presence of an output schema, and reactive annotations, the description fully equips an agent with purpose, usage criteria, alternative routing, and behavioral constraints. Nothing essential is missing.

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 per-parameter descriptions, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds only the max-20-symbol limit (already in the schema) and partial-miss behavior, but doesn't explain each parameter beyond the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the description adds no significant semantic value over the schema.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Batch quotes up to 20 symbols' with partial-miss tolerance. It explicitly names sibling tools and the conditions under which to use them instead, making it unmistakably distinct from get_market_snapshot, markettrend_get_kline, and get_market_overview.

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?

Provides direct routing guidance: 'One symbol→get_market_snapshot. Deep trend→markettrend_get_kline. Breadth→get_market_overview.' This tells an agent exactly when to choose this batch tool versus the alternatives, leaving no ambiguity.

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