get_stock_info

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

No annotations are provided. The description mentions data source (Yahoo Finance) but lacks details on rate limits, data freshness, caching, or whether it triggers mutations. It lists categories but no behavioral traits beyond the basic operation.

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 reasonably structured with a list of categories, but it is verbose, repeating 'Include the following information:' and enumerating many items. It could be more concise without losing meaning.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain parameters like fields and page, and does not describe the return format or pagination behavior. A more complete description would cover these 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%. Of 4 parameters (ticker, fields, page, export_path), only ticker is mentioned in the description. The fields parameter's purpose (filtering results) and format are undefined, and page/export_path are not explained. The description adds no value over the schema.

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 stock information for a ticker from Yahoo Finance and lists broad categories. It is specific about the resource (stock info) and action (get). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_financial_statement or get_holder_info, which also return financial 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for general stock info, but does not specify scenarios where siblings would be more appropriate (e.g., detailed financial statement vs. overview).

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