get_quote

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the source (Yahoo Finance) and currency (INR), and implies 'live' data, but does not disclose data freshness, rate limits, or potential side effects. For a read-only quote tool, this is adequate but could be more explicit.

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 sentences, no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with core purpose, then specifics, then currency. Every sentence adds 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?

Given the simplicity (1 param, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the key use case and returned fields. It could mention error handling or possible delays in live data, but overall it is complete enough for an agent 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 lone parameter (symbol) is already well-documented in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds significant value by explaining that .NS is appended automatically and that .BO queries BSE, providing crucial usage context beyond the schema.

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 it provides live stock quotes from Yahoo Finance for NSE-listed stocks, and lists specific data fields (price, 52-week range, volume, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_by_symbol or get_market_status.

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 use for getting detailed quote data for NSE stocks, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search_by_symbol for just symbols, or get_nifty_indices for index data). No guidance on exclusions or prerequisites.

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