yahoo_price

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds asset-class coverage and mentions 'real-time,' but doesn't disclose output format, latency, or rate limits. For a simple read-only tool, this is adequate but not enriched.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for purpose and one for parameters. It is front-loaded with the core action and includes only essential details, with no unnecessary words.

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 required parameter, clear annotations), the description is nearly complete. It covers symbol syntax and asset types. The only minor gap is the lack of return-format details, but since this is a simple quote tool, the description is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 schema provides only the parameter name 'symbol' with no description (0% coverage). The description compensates with a dedicated Args section that explains the symbol format and provides concrete examples (AAPL, BTC-USD, ^GSPC, THYAO.IS), giving the agent actionable guidance beyond the schema.

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 tool's function: 'Real-time price quote from Yahoo Finance for any stock, crypto, ETF or index.' It uses a specific verb ('quote') and resource ('Yahoo Finance symbol'), and explicitly lists supported asset classes, making it distinct from historical data tools like stock_prices.

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 phrase 'Real-time price quote' provides clear context for when to use the tool (immediate pricing needs). It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, so it falls short of a 5. However, the usage scenario is unambiguous.

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