avanza_realtime_quotes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It reveals the tool is a snapshot suitable for polling and hints that holdings must be 'selected', but it does not disclose authentication/session needs, rate-limit behavior, side effects, or failure modes. This is minimal for a real-time financial data tool.

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 with a front-loaded verb, a clear object, and a parenthetical polling tip. There is no filler, and every phrase 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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the snapshot contains, how account selection works, and how this tool differs from similar quote tools. It provides none of those, so an agent may know how to invoke it but not how to interpret results or choose it confidently among siblings.

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?

Schema description coverage is 67%, with session_id and tenant_session_id described, but account_id has no schema description. The phrase 'selected account holdings' loosely implies account_id maps to an account, but it does not clarify optionality or how selection interacts with the parameter, so the description only partially compensates.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and identifies a clear resource ('real-time quote snapshot for selected account holdings'), making the core action understandable. However, it does not differentiate from closely related siblings such as avanza_live_snapshot or avanza_orderbook_quotes, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

The only usage guidance is 'best with a 5s polling loop', which provides a cadence but no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus alternative quote/orderbook tools. It implies a near-real-time monitoring use case but leaves selection among the many siblings to inference.

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