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 adds useful context: real-time data, post-market timing, and the specific data fields (bid, ask, volume). However, it does not disclose potential behavioral nuances like symbol limits, missing aftermarket quotes, or rate limiting.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and resource, and contains zero filler or redundant 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?

For a simple one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently communicates the data scope (bid, ask, volume, other relevant data) and timing. It does not delve into return structure or limitations, but the tool is straightforward enough that this feels incomplete only at the margins.

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 the parameter description 'Comma-separated list of stock symbols'. The tool description reinforces the 'multiple stocks' aspect but adds no new format or constraints beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description uses the specific verb 'Retrieve' and accurate resource 'aftermarket quotes for multiple stocks', clearly distinguishing it from singular getAftermarketQuote and regular-hours getBatchQuotes by emphasizing batch and post-market context.

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 clear context for when to use (multiple stocks, during post-market trading) but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. The post-market and multiple-stock cues make the intended use obvious without needing to mention sibling tools.

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