Google Finance API

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'fetch' without mentioning potential rate limits, authentication, data freshness, or response formats. It does not even explicitly confirm it is read-only, although 'fetch' implies it. This is a minimal disclosure that does not prepare the agent for possible behavioral nuances.

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 with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the main action ('Fetch live stock quotes and market data') and source ('from Google Finance'), making it easy to parse and immediately informative.

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 tool with three parameters, one required, no output schema, and no nested objects, the complexity is low. The description gives a clear purpose, and the schema documents all parameters. It lacks detail on response structure and potential limitations, but given its simplicity, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema has 100% coverage of parameter descriptions, including ticker format and language code, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as examples or parameter constraints. It does not compensate or elaborate on any parameter specifics.

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 fetches live stock quotes and market data from Google Finance, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like google_news or google_search, which serve different purposes. The action and scope are immediately clear.

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, nor are any exclusions or alternative tools mentioned. Usage is only implied by the tool name and purpose, not explicitly stated. An agent is left without clear direction on when to choose google_finance over other search tools.

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