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

The description says 'Public' which hints at safe read-only behavior, and lists return fields. However, without annotations, it does not fully disclose side effects, data freshness, error behavior, or whether results are limited. It provides some context but leaves gaps.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose and return values. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description explains the main return components (quote source, timestamp, instrument rows) and the schema covers parameter defaults. This is sufficient for basic invocation, though 'instrument rows' is vague.

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 input schema already provides full coverage for the single 'symbols' parameter with a clear description and default behavior. The tool description adds no extra meaning about parameters, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 function: providing public market price context for supported instruments. It also specifies the return contents (quote source, timestamp, instrument rows), which distinguishes it from the sibling news/search tools.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of appropriate use cases, exclusions, or how it differs from the sibling tools. The description is purely declarative.

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