get_stock_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the default output mode (text) and that json is opt-in, but says nothing about multi-symbol batching behavior, error handling for unknown symbols, rate limits, or auth requirements. It is adequate for a simple read tool but not rich.

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 short sentences, zero filler, and the return contents are front-loaded ahead of routing and format notes. Every sentence carries distinct 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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description compensates by listing the returned metrics and the format toggle, which is largely sufficient for an agent to call it correctly. Minor gaps remain around multi-symbol output shape and failure behavior.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description's 'Text default; set format=json' only restates what the schema's enum and default already convey. Baseline 3 applies since the description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the structured field.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Returns valuation and trading metrics') and enumerates the metric families (P/E, yield, ranges, volume, bid/ask), so an agent knows exactly what it produces. It also explicitly names the sibling it is not (get_key_stats), distinguishing it without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit use case ('fundamental screening') and names the alternative tool with the condition that selects it ('use get_key_stats for advanced ratios'). Routing between the two siblings is unambiguous.

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