search_symbols

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that this is a search tool and lists returned fields. However, it does not mention rate limits, pagination, or whether multiple results are always returned. For a read-only search, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Description is well-structured with headings for returned fields and examples. It is not overly concise but every sentence adds value. Could be slightly shorter without losing clarity, but acceptable.

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 the complexity of searching across diverse asset types, the description covers input, output fields, and how to use results (ticker for other calls). Sibling tools are many get_* tools, and this description complements them well. Output schema existence is flagged but not shown; still, the return field list is comprehensive.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with clear description for the 'query' parameter. Description adds value by giving concrete search examples and explaining the returned ticker format for use in other tools. This goes beyond the schema's basic description.

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?

Description explicitly states it searches for symbols, indicators, assets, or indices, with examples like 'US GDP', 'US CPI', 'interest rate'. Clearly distinguishes from other tools by its focus on finding tickers when exact symbol is unknown.

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?

Provides explicit context: 'Use this tool to find tickers... when you don't know the exact prefix or symbol name.' Implicitly suggests it's a discovery tool before using other get_* tools. Does not list when not to use, but context is clear.

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