yahoo_finance_lookup

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic function. It lacks details on authentication, rate limits, pagination behavior, error handling, or what the response contains. For a tool that returns matches, this is insufficient.

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 short sentences with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the tool name and purpose, making it easy to scan.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters (pagination offset/limit) and no output schema, the description does not explain how count/start affect results, what instrument types are valid, or the format of returned matches. It is incomplete for a search/lookup tool.

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?

All four parameters have descriptions in the schema, so baseline is 3. The description only adds 'optionally filtered by instrument type', which mirrors the schema's 'Instrument type filter'. No additional meaning or usage hints beyond the schema.

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 clearly states it returns Yahoo Finance instrument matches for a query with optional type filter. It is specific about the resource (instrument matches) and the action (lookup). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'yahoo_finance_search', which may have a similar purpose.

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 like yahoo_finance_search or ticker-specific tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it.

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