Search Stock

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Find' and gives examples, without revealing details such as case sensitivity, exact matching behavior, pagination/limits, or whether the exchange parameter changes the search scope. Some behavioral expectations are implied but not explicitly disclosed.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the action ('Find trading codes') and uses examples to convey the substring behavior efficiently, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

Although the tool is simple and has an output schema, the description omits essential context about the 'exchange' parameter and does not provide usage guidance. Given no annotations, the missing parameter explanation and lack of guidance leave the description incomplete for reliable invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the parameters directly. It implies that 'query' is a substring, but it does not explain the 'exchange' parameter or its default value 'dse'. Since the schema provides no descriptions, the text needed to clarify both parameters, and it only partially addresses 'query'.

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: 'Find trading codes containing a substring', with concrete examples such as 'BANK' or 'PHARMA'. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_stock, which likely retrieves a specific stock rather than searching by substring, though it does not explicitly name the sibling it differs from.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_stock or top_movers. The description implies a search use case, but it does not state when to choose this tool, what limitations exist, or when another sibling would be more appropriate.

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