x402_stock

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It adds the useful pricing detail of $0.01 USDC/call, but it does not state whether quotes are real-time or delayed, what fields are returned, or whether any side effects exist. For a read-only quote tool, this is adequate but minimal.

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 extremely concise and front-loads the core operation. The pricing parenthetical is the only extra detail and is relevant for a paid tool, so every element earns its place.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, and the description is nearly sufficient for an agent to select and use it. It could mention whether quotes are US-only or delayed, but the low complexity makes these omissions minor.

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 already documents the single 'ticker' parameter with an example, providing 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning about ticker format, supported exchanges, or market scope, so it stays at the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 identifies the operation as a 'quote' and the resource as 'stock', which is specific and unambiguous. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like x402_crypto, x402_fx, and x402_news even without naming them.

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 intended use is implied by the phrase 'Stock quote', but the description does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or which sibling might be more appropriate for related asset classes.

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