resolve_securities

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

With no annotations, the description reveals it is a read-only (scanned once) and filters data, but does not explicitly confirm no side effects or detailed error 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?

Three front-loaded sentences with no redundancy, each adding distinct information: purpose, static scan, exclusion, and ambiguity handling.

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 omits return format, type of display metadata, and how ambiguous identifiers are represented in output. Without output schema, more detail is expected for a single-parameter tool.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the format or constraints of the 'identifiers' parameter beyond hinting they are exact public identifiers. More detail is needed.

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 tool resolves exact public security identifiers to safe display metadata, a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling search_securities by focusing on exact identifiers and safe display output.

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 provides constraints (scanned once, never returns account topics or raw rows, ambiguous identifiers unresolved) which imply when to use, but does not explicitly compare with siblings or give when-not-to-use guidance.

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