get_sanitized_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behaviors. It mentions 'data quality check' but does not explain what that entails (e.g., normalization, filtering), nor does it disclose any side effects, permissions, or latency implications. This is insufficient for an unannotated tool.

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 extremely short at one sentence. While it is concise, it lacks necessary detail to be informative, making it borderline under-specified.

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?

Given the absence of schema descriptions and annotations, the description is too minimal to fully prepare an agent. The output schema exists but the description does not leverage it to reduce burden. The 'data quality check' aspect remains vague.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. However, it does not describe the meaning or usage of 'symbol' or 'broker'. The broker parameter has a default but no explanation of how it affects results.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'underlying quote' with a qualifier 'data quality check', indicating a specialized quote. It is distinct from sibling tools (get_circuit_status, get_compressed_chain) due to the focus on quotes and data quality, but the term 'sanitized' is not explained.

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 siblings or under what conditions. There is no mention of alternatives or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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