Find Instrument

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive. The description adds value by stating the output is UIDs needed by other tools, which is useful behavioral context. No contradictions.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds distinct value—no filler.

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?

The description explains the output's purpose (UIDs for other tools) but does not detail the return structure (e.g., array of objects). Without an output schema, a brief note on the result format would make it more complete. Still, for a search tool with clear annotations, it is adequately complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add much. The description supports the query parameter by listing search types, but adds no extra meaning beyond what the input schema already provides for all three parameters.

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 action ('Search'), the resource ('instruments'), and the supported identifiers ('ticker, ISIN, FIGI or name'). It also highlights the output ('UIDs required by other tools'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_instrument (which likely expects a UID).

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 usage before other tools that require UIDs, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings like get_instrument. The context is clear enough for an agent to infer, but explicit 'when not to use' or alternative names would elevate it.

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