getShareFloat

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing behavioral beyond that: no statement about whether the value is a current snapshot, how float differs from shares outstanding, or freshness/latency of the data.

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, front-loaded with the resource, but the second half is marketing language ('make informed investment decisions') that does not help an agent decide or invoke. Roughly half the text is not load-bearing.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but omits what the response contains (float shares vs. outstanding shares, currency/units, historical vs. latest). An agent can call it, but cannot predict the payload.

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 single required parameter 'symbol' is documented in the schema with 100% coverage, so the schema carries the burden. The description only gestures at 'any company' and adds no format or symbol-resolution detail (e.g., exchange suffixes) 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 names a specific resource and what it returns: 'the total number of publicly traded shares for any company.' That is enough to distinguish it from most siblings, but it never differentiates from the closely related getAllShareFloat (bulk variant), and the framing sentence is branding rather than definition.

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 guidance, no mention of when to prefer getAllShareFloat for multiple symbols, and no prerequisites. 'To make informed investment decisions' is promotional filler, not a usage condition.

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