Search instruments

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

Annotations already establish this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful context by listing returned fields and mentioning that other tools need the UIC + AssetType, but it does not disclose further behavioral traits such as match semantics, result limits beyond the schema's top parameter, or ordering behavior.

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?

Two focused sentences with no filler: the purpose is front-loaded, the returned fields are listed clearly, and every sentence 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?

The description is complete enough for selecting and invoking the tool: it explains what the tool returns and why it matters for other market-data tools. Minor gaps remain around includeNonTradable and explicit routing to sibling tools, but the annotations and schema carry much of the load.

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 80%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema and leaves the undocumented includeNonTradable parameter unaddressed, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 and resource: 'Look up instruments by name, ticker or ISIN' and clarifies the key output (Saxo UIC + AssetType). It also distinguishes this tool from sibling market-data tools by explaining that those tools depend on these identifiers.

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 clearly positions the tool as the lookup step that feeds other market data tools, giving an agent a strong signal for when to invoke it. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use them, but the intended role is clear.

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