List Tickers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered; the description adds real behavioral value by disclosing the default page size of 50 and the 'matched' / 'next_offset' paging contract. It stops short of stating a total cap (the schema mentions max 200) or full return shape.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences with no filler; the pagination mechanics come last where an agent needs them. Minor redundancy with the schema on the default of 50, but it is tied to the paging explanation.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description covers the essential return contract (list of tickers with exchange info, 'matched' count, 'next_offset'), which is enough to page correctly. A little more detail on response fields would make it fully self-sufficient.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns extra by explaining the round-trip pattern of passing 'next_offset' back as 'offset' and clarifying what 'matched' means, which the schema alone does not connect.

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 and resource with scope qualifiers: 'List all active SEC-registered tickers with exchange info, optionally filtered by search query'. An agent can tell this is a ticker enumeration tool, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like sec_lookup_cik.

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?

Gives concrete use cases: 'finding a company's ticker symbol or seeing what's listed on a particular exchange'. That is clear context for selection, but no explicit when-not or named alternative is given.

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