get_quote

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds value by stating the data is real-time and free, and by clarifying Japanese symbol conventions. It does not mention what fields are returned, rate limits, market coverage, or error behavior.

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 extremely compact, front-loads the core purpose, and uses short fragments for additional guidance. Every element adds useful operational information, and the formatting conventions are directly actionable.

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?

This is a low-complexity single-parameter tool, and the schema fully documents the parameter. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least hint at what a quote contains or which markets are supported beyond Japan. It is enough for a basic call but leaves the agent guessing about the return shape and global symbol handling.

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 schema only says the symbol is a 'Ticker or Japanese name.' The description adds concrete meaning with the .T suffix rule, an explicit example (7203.T=Toyota), and confirmation that Japanese names are accepted. This materially improves parameter understanding.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Real-time stock quote.' The Japanese symbol guidance and example make it clear this fetches current market data. It distinguishes itself from chart/analysis tools, though it does not explicitly contrast with multi_quote.

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 gives useful input-format usage context: use .T for Japan, Japanese names are accepted, and it is free. However, it provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over its siblings, such as multi_quote for multiple symbols or search_stocks for finding tickers.

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