stock_at_time_trade

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only gives a minimal definition. It does not explain behavior around date ranges (start_date/end_date interplay), timezone handling (beyond schema), or edge cases like missing trades at the specified time. The '[STANDARD]' prefix adds no behavioral context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. However, it is very minimal and could include a second sentence to clarify usage or behavior without becoming verbose.

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 has five parameters including a date range and venue, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how start_date and end_date relate to time_of_day, nor the impact of venue selection. With no output schema or annotations, the description should cover more of the tool's behavior.

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 provides 100% coverage for all parameters with descriptions, so the tool description does not need to repeat them. The description's mention of 'time of day' aligns with the time_of_day parameter but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already specifies.

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 retrieves the last trade for a stock at a specified time of day. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like stock_snapshot_trade (current trade) and stock_history_trade (range-based), making the resource and scope explicit.

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 implies usage for point-in-time trade queries but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives such as stock_snapshot_trade or stock_history_trade. No exclusions or decision guidance are provided.

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