get_asset_info

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, which convey that this is a safe, read-only operation. The description adds the specific output fields (full name, market, description, current price) but does not discuss error handling, response format, or other behavioral traits. This adds some value beyond the annotations, appropriate for a 3.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the action and lists the returned data types without any unnecessary words or repetition.

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 read-only lookup with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately specifies the returned information (full name, market, description, current price). It doesn't provide the exact response format or error behavior, but given the simplicity and annotation coverage, it is sufficiently complete.

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 100% coverage for the single parameter 'symbol' with the description 'Ticker or company name to look up.' The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'descriptive information about an instrument' with the additional output of current price. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_asset_price (which focuses solely on price) and get_assets (which lists assets).

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 establishes clear context for when to use the tool: when both descriptive information and current price are needed. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state exclusions, but the content makes the distinction obvious, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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