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

While annotations already cover safety (`readOnlyHint: true`), the description provides significant behavioral context by listing the specific data points returned (e.g., Chainlink reference price, SEC filings count, corporate actions). This informs the agent exactly what kind of data aggregation to expect.

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 dense but highly efficient. It front-loads the nature of the data and the function of the parameters before adding the specific instructions for usage and tool differentiation, minimizing unnecessary jargon.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description is highly complete, detailing the core attributes of each token object returned (ticker, issuer's name, contract, reference price, status, and action counts). This allows the agent to understand the data structure without external documentation.

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?

Even though schema coverage is 100%, the description adds semantic value by explaining the purpose of the query parameter—it allows filtering by either ticker or partial company name (e.g., 'NVDA, nvidia'). This context helps an agent choose the correct query format.

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 identifies the resource (Stock Tokens listed on Robinhood Chain) and provides necessary context (details returned, filtering capabilities). Crucially, it distinguishes this listing function from the singular `stock_token` tool sibling, making it immediately clear what this tool achieves.

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 provides explicit instructions on how to use the filtering parameters: `query` for ticker/name matching and `limit` for quantity. It also provides an explicit usage guideline for when *not* to use this tool, directing the agent to `stock_token` when a single item is needed.

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