get_latest_prices_global

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions the subscription requirement, which is a key behavioral constraint. However, it does not describe the return format, potential errors, or whether the result is a list or single value. For a simple read tool, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core function and adds the subscription requirement. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential function and a prerequisite. However, it lacks detail about the difference from the sibling tool get_latest_prices (the global scope is only implied by the name) and does not describe the response structure. It is adequate but leaves some gaps.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty, so there is no parameter information to add. Per the rubric, 0 params merits a baseline score of 4, and the description does not need to compensate for any missing parameter details.

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 Global instruments.' It uses a specific verb ('Get'), a resource ('stock price'), and a scope ('all Global instruments'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_prices_by_date_global and get_latest_prices. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides clear context that this is for global instruments and includes a prerequisite ('Requires Pro+ subscription'). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, though the global scope is a strong implicit differentiator. This is better than vague but lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

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