Quote snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does reveal that the quote is delayed and lists return fields, which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state it is a read-only/safe operation, nor does it mention absence of side effects, authentication, or latency characteristics. Given the lack of annotations, this is insufficient.

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, focused sentence: 'Delayed last-close snapshot for a ticker (last, volume, dollar volume).' Every word contributes value, with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the key qualifier 'Delayed' and immediately specifies the output fields.

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?

For a simple quote tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is quite complete. It names the output fields (last, volume, dollar volume) and the delayed nature. It does not describe the exact response JSON structure or error behavior, but given the low complexity and the presence of sibling tools, this is sufficient. It could benefit from stating that it returns a snapshot for a given ticker, which is already clear.

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 a description for the single parameter 'ticker' with an example (TSLA), covering 100% of parameter semantics. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 returns a 'Delayed last-close snapshot' with specific fields (last, volume, dollar volume). The word 'Delayed' differentiates it from sibling godel_live_quote, making the scope clear. Though it lacks an explicit verb like 'gets', the resource and scope are unambiguous.

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 when to use it via 'Delayed' versus the sibling 'godel_live_quote', but it does not explicitly state 'use for last-close data' or 'use godel_live_quote for real-time quotes'. There is no direct when/when-not guidance, only an implied context.

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