avanza_search_stock

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Search' and 'data' indicate a read-only lookup and the identifier types define scope, but it does not disclose output shape, match behavior, or authentication prerequisites. This is adequate but thin.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence that names the action, object, and acceptable inputs. There is no filler and no unnecessary repetition of schema details.

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 simple two-parameter search tool, the essential call details are present: the query semantics and the optional limit. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the agent is left to infer the return format and whether an active session is required, so completeness is only partial.

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 no property descriptions, so the description must clarify parameters. It clarifies that 'query' accepts a name, ticker, or ISIN, which is the critical semantic. The 'limit' parameter is not described but is already well-specified by the schema's default, minimum, and maximum.

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 states a specific verb ('Search'), a resource ('Avanza stock/order book data'), and acceptable identifier types ('name, ticker, or ISIN'). This makes the tool's role clear even among many Avanza siblings, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from similar lookup tools.

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 identifier types imply a use case: when the agent needs to resolve a stock by name, ticker, or ISIN. However, the description does not mention alternatives or conditions for choosing another sibling, so usage guidance is only implied rather than explicit.

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