Instrument Search

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

The description discloses that the tool is free and read-only, and does not fetch live prices. These are important behavioral traits, especially since no annotations are provided. However, it could mention that results are based on a search query, but overall it is sufficiently transparent.

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 concise at 12 words, front-loading the action. It could be slightly more structured, but it contains no filler and every phrase 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 100% schema coverage and existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers basic behavior. However, it lacks guidance on how to differentiate among sibling tools (e.g., search vs. list_instruments) and does not mention search behavior like fuzzy matching.

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 description coverage is 100%: both parameters (query and asset_class) have clear descriptions. The tool description adds no further meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score 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 'Search supported Blocksize instruments,' specifying the verb and resource. It adds 'Free, read-only, and does not fetch live prices,' which distinguishes it from sibling data-fetching tools like get_pricing_info or get_market_data_endpoint.

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 implicitly indicates read-only use for discovery, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like 'search' or 'list_instruments.' No specific when-not-to-use or alternative guidance is provided.

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