Search Alpaca API Specs

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it does not execute endpoints, it searches only Trading/Market Data/Authentication APIs, and it excludes Broker API. The instruction 'Use `query`; do not use `pattern`' also clarifies an important operational constraint.

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?

Three sentences, no filler, with purpose front-loaded and usage/scope details following in logical order. Every sentence contributes actionable information.

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 single-parameter read-only search tool, the description covers what it searches, when to use it, what it does not do, and the parameter to use. Together with the existing output schema and annotations, nothing essential is missing.

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 provides only a bare 'query' string with 0% description coverage ROC, so the description carries the full burden. It compensates by defining what the query can match and explicitly instructing to use `query` rather than `pattern`, giving the agent enough semantics to call the tool correctly.

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 ('Search'), a clear resource ('Alpaca API reference endpoints'), and the dimensions of search ('topic, operation, path fragment, parameter, or schema term'). It also distinguishes itself from similar doc/endpoint tools by scoping to reference endpoints and excluding Broker API.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use when the exact method and path are unknown,' giving a clear trigger condition. However, it does not name alternative sibling tools like get_alpaca_endpoint_docs or fetch_alpaca_doc, nor does it state an explicit 'when not to use' rule.

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