stock_return

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses only the $0.001 USDC x402 cost, but not core behavioral traits such as what actions it performs, whether it is read-only, or what side effects it has. This is insufficient for a finance tool.

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 short but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It wastes the few words on repeating the name and a broad category, providing no operational value.

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?

With no annotations, a bare schema, and a vague description, the tool is critically under-specified. It lacks purpose, parameter semantics, and output expectations, making it nearly impossible to use correctly.

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 only defines a generic 'params' JSON object with no documented properties. The description adds no parameter information, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of specificity. An agent cannot know what inputs to provide.

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 says 'stock return — Finance & Math tool,' which repeats the tool name without a verb or specific action. It fails to state whether the tool calculates stock returns, fetches stock data, or something else, and does not distinguish it from sibling finance tools.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only mentions a category and cost, with no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions relative to other finance calculators.

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