schwab_order_sell_stop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully cover behavioral traits. However, it only states the action without disclosing side effects, required permissions, order lifecycle, rate limits, or return information. The output schema exists but is not described, leaving the agent uninformed about what happens after placing the order.

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 concise and well-structured. The first line states the purpose, followed by a clear parameter list. No redundant or excessive information. Every sentence is meaningful and 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?

Despite good parameter descriptions, the tool definition is incomplete for a trading order. It lacks details about return values (output schema exists but not described), constraints (e.g., stop price relative to market), and potential differences from similar sibling tools like 'sell_stock_stop_loss'. The agent cannot fully understand the tool's behavior or consequences.

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 description adds significant value beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It explains each parameter: 'account_hash' (source from another tool), 'symbol', 'quantity', and 'stop_price' (with example format). This is essential for correct tool invocation.

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's purpose: 'Place a stop sell order for stock.' It specifies the verb ('place') and resource ('stop sell order for stock'), and the 'stop' term distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'sell_stock_limit' or 'sell_stock_market'.

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 description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks explicit context for when a stop order is appropriate, no mention of prerequisites or comparisons to other order types available in the sibling tools.

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