get_stock_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It only states 'Get company profile' without explicitly confirming it is read-only, mentioning authentication requirements, rate limits, or data source. The verb 'Get' implies no side effects, but the description adds no extra behavioral context beyond that.

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 exceptionally concise, consisting of one purpose sentence and one parameter definition. It is front-loaded with the main action, and every word adds value, with no redundancy or filler.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter semantics. However, it omits any usage context or explicit notes about output behavior, though the output schema mitigates the necessity of explaining return values. The lack of usage guidance is a minor gap.

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 zero description coverage, but the description compensates well by defining 'ticker' as a stock ticker symbol and providing the example 'AAPL'. This makes the parameter's purpose clear and adds practical meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 retrieves company profile and descriptive information for a stock, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_income_statement, get_stock_price, and get_company_facts. The verb 'Get' and resource 'company profile' are specific and unambiguous.

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. It does not mention scenarios like 'use for company overview' or exclude cases best suited for get_company_facts or financial statement tools. The agent is left to infer usage context from the tool's name.

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