schwab_buy_stock_limit

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It only states the action without detailing side effects, required permissions, order validity, or error conditions. For a trading tool, this is insufficient.

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 short and front-loaded with the main verb. However, the Args list repeats parameter names unnecessarily; could be more compact without loss of clarity.

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 4 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description is minimally complete. It covers the basic purpose and arguments but omits context like order specifics, time-in-force, or response details.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds brief explanations for each parameter (e.g., account_hash from schwab_account_numbers, symbol as ticker). This adds some meaning beyond titles but lacks constraints like integer for quantity or price format.

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 it places a limit buy order for stock, using specific verb 'place', resource 'limit buy order', and distinguishes from siblings like schwab_buy_stock_market and schwab_sell_stock_limit.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The description implicitly differentiates from market orders via the 'limit' keyword, but does not mention prerequisites like having sufficient funds or market hours.

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