equity_get_quote

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context: 'Informational (not a buy/sell signal)' and explains the 52-week range calculation. No contradiction with annotations.

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 well-structured, front-loaded with purpose, followed by an informational note, args, returns, and examples. Every sentence adds value, and there is no 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of output schema (implied by detailed return field listing), the description fully covers what the agent needs: purpose, parameters, return format, and usage examples. Annotations provide safety signals.

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 description explains both parameters (ticker and response_format) with examples, adding meaning beyond the schema. For instance, it clarifies that response_format can be 'markdown' or 'json' and provides example queries.

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 gets a current price snapshot with 52-week range context, using specific verbs and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like equity_analyst_consensus or equity_valuation by focusing solely on price data.

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: 'Use this to anchor any analysis with live price...' and explicitly states it is informational, not a buy/sell signal. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or provide alternative tool names.

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