yahoo_finance_search

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not detail behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication, error handling, or pagination. It only states what the tool returns, lacking transparency beyond that.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the key purpose. It contains no unnecessary words and is well-structured.

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 absence of an output schema, the description provides a high-level overview of return types (quotes, news, lists, research). However, it lacks details on result structure, pagination, and error behavior, making it only moderately complete for a search tool with 6 parameters.

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 has 100% description coverage for all 6 parameters, so the schema already clearly defines each parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which is adequate for a baseline of 3.

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 performs a Yahoo Finance search and returns normalized quotes, news, lists, and optional research reports for a query. This distinguishes it from more specific sibling tools like yahoo_finance_ticker_quote or yahoo_finance_news, but does not explicitly contrast with them.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, when to prefer this over more specific Yahoo Finance tools, or any exclusions.

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