get_quote

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool returns ('current price and key intraday figures') but does not mention data latency, authentication requirements, error handling, or whether output is real-time or delayed. The behavioral profile is minimally described.

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, front-loaded sentence of 10 words. It directly states the action and key result with no unnecessary words, earning every character.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema present), the description is sufficient for basic use. It could be slightly improved by noting that it returns intraday data for a single symbol, differentiating from historical or multi-symbol tools, but overall it is mostly complete.

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 a detailed description of the 'symbol' parameter, including examples and a note about using 'search' for company names. The tool description does not add further meaning to the parameter, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('current price and key intraday figures for a Yahoo symbol'), which is specific and informative. However, it does not differentiate from sibling 'get_quotes' (plural) which might serve a similar purpose, leaving some ambiguity.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other tools like 'get_quotes', 'get_history', or 'get_fund_data'. The description only implies usage for a single symbol's current price, but does not specify limitations or alternatives.

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