stock_token_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what happens for invalid tokens. For a query tool, this is a notable gap.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with key information, no fluff. Every word earns its place.

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?

The description adequately covers what the tool returns for a simple query tool with one parameter. However, it could mention error handling or output format, though the absence of an output schema makes this less critical.

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 only parameter 'token' has a schema description 'Stock token contract address', and the description adds context by specifying it's a Robinhood Stock Token. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate; no additional parameter-level details are provided.

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 returns the 'Full state of a Robinhood Stock Token' and enumerates specific data: metadata, corporate-action multiplier, supply variants, and pause flags. This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from siblings like stock_balance or check_corporate_action.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives such as stock_balance, stock_token_terms, or check_corporate_action. The description implies it's for comprehensive state retrieval but does not specify exclusions or when not to use.

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