get_quote

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. 'Live' does disclose data freshness, but nothing is said about auth requirements, rate limits, or behavior on an invalid/missing scripcode. For a simple read tool this is acceptable but thin.

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?

Purpose and return contents are front-loaded in one dense but informative sentence, followed by a single compact parameter note. No filler, no redundancy.

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 output schema and no annotations, the field enumeration is what makes the tool callable and interpretable. The only gap is the absence of usage routing against the many sibling lookup tools.

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% — the property 'scripcode' has no description — but the description compensates by defining it as 'the 5-6 digit BSE code', supplying both the identity and the expected format.

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?

States a specific resource and scope: 'Live price and key facts for one BSE scrip', then enumerates the exact data points (LTP, change, ranges, valuation ratios, flags). This clearly separates it from get_financials and get_market_depth, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing. The phrase 'for one BSE scrip' only faintly implies a single-scrip lookup versus list_scrips/search_scrips; an agent gets no signal on choosing this over get_market_depth or get_financials.

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