Search Stock

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clearly indicates a read-only substring search, which is straightforward, but it does not disclose details like case sensitivity, match limits, or empty-result behavior.

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?

A single sentence with examples conveys the tool's purpose without wasted words. The key scoping information ('DSE trading codes', 'containing a substring') is front-loaded.

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 search tool with an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could add a brief note on return format or matching behavior, but those are minor given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema.

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 only defines 'query' as a string with 0% schema description coverage. The description adds the essential meaning: the query is a substring matched against DSE trading codes, and the examples illustrate expected input values.

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 uses a specific verb ('Find'), a clear resource ('DSE trading codes'), and a precise matching rule ('containing a substring') with concrete examples. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_stock, top_movers, and market_summary.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool: when you have a partial stock code and need matching codes. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it, such as when an exact code is already known.

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