get_company_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output contents (valuation metrics, business summary) and the input prerequisite (resolve via search). While it does not explicitly state 'read-only', the get framing and lack of side effects make the behavior clear enough.

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 concise and front-loaded: it states the purpose, then lists outputs, then the constraint. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy or fluff.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with a 100% documented schema and an output schema, the description fully covers purpose, input constraints, output contents, and sibling differentiation. It leaves no critical gap for an agent to misuse the 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?

The input schema already provides 100% description coverage for the symbol parameter, including the ISIN/WKN prohibition and search-first advice. The tool description only repeats this information without adding further parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Get a company profile and key statistics for a Yahoo symbol.' It lists concrete return fields (name, sector, valuation metrics, business summary), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_quote, get_estimates, and search.

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 explicitly states the input must be a native Yahoo Finance ticker and instructs to 'resolve those via search first,' providing clear when-to-use and when-to-use-alternative guidance. This preemptively avoids misuse with ISINs or company names.

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