stocks_tickers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It simply says 'List stock tickers' without disclosing pagination, response size, ordering, or any other caveats. For a potentially large list endpoint, this is a notable gap—an agent might assume all tickers are returned in one response.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place, and the main action is immediately clear.

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, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimal. It covers basic behavior but lacks any note on pagination or response structure. Given the large number of sibling ticker tools, a brief clarification that this is the base stock ticker list (distinct from gainers/losers) would improve completeness without bloating the description.

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 100% because both parameters have descriptions with examples. The description adds that they are optional filters, which is redundant but confirms the filtering intent. It does not add new information beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 'List stock tickers' with a clear verb and resource, and the optional filters specify scope. It distinguishes from sibling asset-class tickers (etf_tickers, crypto_tickers) by naming 'stock', but it does not explicitly differentiate from stocks_gainers/losers or the more targeted stocks_list_* tools. Clarity is strong but not perfect.

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 implies usage for fetching the full stock ticker list with optional country/exchange filters. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over stocks_gainers, stocks_losers, or stocks_list_country/exchange. The presence of sibling list tools suggests more specific alternatives exist, but no guidance is given on selecting among them.

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