Search Instruments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. The description adds context about the output format and downstream chaining. It does not contradict annotations. However, it does not disclose rate limits or data freshness.

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?

Two concise sentences, no filler. First sentence states the core purpose, second describes output and usage. Highly efficient.

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 has 7 parameters, many siblings, and no output schema, the description provides only the essentials. It fails to explain optional filters (exchangeIds, accountKey, etc.) or pagination behavior. Adequate for basic use but incomplete for complex queries.

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 0%. The description only mentions keywords and assetTypes, while there are 5 other parameters (exchangeIds, accountKey, includeNonTradable, top, skip) left undocumented. This is insufficient compensation for low 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 ('Search'), the resource ('Saxo reference data for instruments'), and key search criteria ('by keyword and asset type'). It also specifies the output ('Uic and AssetType') and their downstream use, distinguishing it from sibling tools like saxo_get_instrument_details.

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?

Usage context is implied from the name and description but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., saxo_get_instrument_details). No 'use this when' or 'do not use when' statements.

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