get_securities_info

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It correctly portrays a read-only query, specifies return fields, and mentions a 50-result limit. No contradictions, but lacks details on pagination, authorization, or rate limits.

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?

Two short sentences that front-load the purpose and efficiently cover return data and filtering. No extraneous 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?

Given only 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It lists return fields and limits. Could enhance by noting pagination behavior for result sets beyond 50, but adequate for typical use.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, and the description adds value by noting partial match support for stock_code and stock_name and listing market filter values. Exceeds baseline expectations.

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?

Clearly states it queries TDCC securities basic information, lists returned fields (code, name, market type, etc.), and specifies filtering options. Distinguishes from siblings like get_director_shareholding or get_evoting_info which cover different data.

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?

Explicitly says to use stock_code or stock_name for filtering, and that no filter returns all results up to 50. Implies this is for basic securities info compared to sibling tools, but no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool mentions.

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