get_quote

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and external-data profile is covered. The description adds that the data is 'current' with intraday figures, implying a live snapshot rather than historical data, but says nothing about staleness, market-hours behavior, or error handling for invalid symbols.

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; the verb, resource and scope arrive immediately and nothing is wasted.

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?

With a fully documented one-parameter schema and an output schema present, the description need not explain return values. It is nearly complete, though it omits any routing cue versus the sibling get_quotes, which is the one thing an agent choosing between them might need.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the single parameter's schema already documents accepted forms (ticker, ISIN) plus the 'search first' fallback. The description contributes no additional parameter meaning, 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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (current price and key intraday figures) scoped to a Yahoo symbol, which is clearer than a bare name restatement. However, it does not distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling get_quotes, leaving the plural/singular split to inference.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The description never mentions the sibling get_quotes for batch retrieval, nor does it carry over the schema's hint to run 'search' first for company names — that guidance lives only in the parameter description.

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