getQuotesRealtime

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses non-final filtering, sort order, parameter priority behavior, a 50-request-per-second rate limit, and possible latency during extreme volatility. This gives the agent meaningful behavioral expectations beyond what annotations alone provide.

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 front-loaded with the core behavior, but it repeats itself: the priority order and quoteLinkId rule appear twice, once in the main description and again in the 'Agent hint'. The repetition adds noise and makes the definition less crisp than it could be.

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?

For a read-only query tool with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key operational details: what is returned, ordering, identifier priority, rate limits, latency behavior, and the historical alternative. It falls slightly short because it does not describe the response format or reconcile the minor wording inconsistency between 'invalid' and 'ignored' for quoteLinkId.

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 provides zero description coverage, but the tool description compensates by explaining identifier priority order and the special rule that quoteLinkId is invalid when traderType is 'request'. It does not describe the individual semantic meaning of each identifier field, which would have made parameter guidance more complete.

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 states a specific action ('Query quotes in real-time from the RFQ engine') and defines the result scope ('Returns all non-final quotes sorted in descending order by createdAt'). It clearly separates this from the historical getQuotes sibling by name in the agent hint.

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 agent hint explicitly directs use to real-time quote data and names the alternative for historical data ('use Get Quotes (quote-list) instead'). It also gives operational rules for parameter priority and when quoteLinkId is invalid, so an agent knows how to select and invoke this tool.

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