stock_info

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

The verb 'Read' implies idempotent read-only behavior, but no annotations are provided to confirm safety. No mention of rate limits, authentication needs, or return structure. The description does not disclose potential side effects or limitations.

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 of 9 words, highly concise and front-loaded with the action. Every word is necessary with no redundancy.

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 no output schema and sparse parameter info, the description lacks details on return values, error handling, or usage limits. Given the number of sibling tools, more context (e.g., typical use cases, example output) would aid agent decision-making.

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 description adds meaning to the 'symbols' parameter by stating it expects comma-separated symbols, which partially compensates for the 0% schema description coverage. However, it does not specify valid symbol formats, case sensitivity, or provide examples.

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 action (Read) and resource (basic stock info) and specifies input format (comma-separated symbols). It adequately distinguishes from sibling tools like candles or stock_warnings, though it could explicitly list what data fields are included.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as candles for historical price data or stock_warnings for alerts. The description does not provide context for selection.

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