stocks_get_last_trade

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states a basic function and fails to disclose what the return value contains, whether it supports null responses, or any data source nuances. It does not contradict any annotations (none present), but it provides minimal behavioral context.

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, front-loaded with the action. It is efficient, though it borders on under-specification rather than proper conciseness.

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 tool is simple with one parameter, but there is no output schema and no annotations. The description does not explain what the 'trade' data includes (price, volume, timestamp), nor does it specify the return format. For a financial data tool, this is insufficient for an agent to confidently select and invoke it correctly.

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 parameter 'symbol' is only defined by its title. The description provides no format, example, or clarification that it expects a stock ticker. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('the most recent trade for a stock'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'stocks_get_last_quote' and 'stocks_get_trades' by specifying 'trade' and 'most recent'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives such as 'stocks_get_trades' for historical data or 'stocks_get_last_quote' for bid/ask. The description lacks any contextual recommendations or exclusions.

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