get_latest_prices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It conveys a read-only operation ('Get the latest stock price') and scope, but lacks details on data freshness (e.g., real-time vs. delayed), return format, or any potential limitations. For a simple getter, this is acceptable but leaves gaps.

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 exactly two sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded in the first sentence and the alternative guidance in the second. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple (0 params, no output schema), but the description only says it returns 'the latest stock price' without describing the response format (e.g., list, structure). Since there is no output schema, the agent does not know the shape of the returned data. The description does provide scope and alternative guidance, but completeness is limited by missing return-value details.

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 has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description correctly adds nothing about parameters, as none exist. No extra guidance is needed.

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: 'Get the latest stock price for all Nordic instruments.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('latest stock price') with scope ('Nordic instruments'), and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_latest_prices_global by noting that global instruments are covered there.

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 description explicitly provides usage guidance: for Nordic instruments use this tool, and for global instruments use get_latest_prices_global (Pro+). This directly tells the agent when to choose this tool versus the key alternative, which is clear and actionable.

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