resolve_symbol

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the purpose and the fact that the output is required for alerts, but it does not disclose error behavior, return structure, or whether the operation is read-only. This is adequate 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and no extraneous words. Each sentence adds value: one defines the function, the other its practical use.

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 simple lookup tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, input format, and typical use case. It gives some indication of the output (canonical symbol + currency-id), though it could be more explicit about the return structure and error handling.

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 only provides an example value ('BYBIT:BTCUSDT.P'), but the description adds the semantic format 'EXCHANGE:TICKER' and explains that the symbol will be resolved to a canonical form plus currency-id. This goes beyond the schema and clarifies the parameter's role.

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 with a specific verb ('Resolve') and resource ('EXCHANGE:TICKER' into canonical symbol plus currency-id). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools focused on alerts, auth, and strategies, making it clear this is a symbol-validation/conversion tool.

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 a concrete use case: 'Useful for checking a symbol exists before creating an alert.' This gives clear context for when to use the tool, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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