get_stock_quote

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds that the result includes bid/ask spreads and intraday trading data, but does not add deeper behavioral context such as freshness, source, or rate limits.

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 short and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose and key returned fields. The Args and Returns sections are slightly redundant because an output schema exists, but they remain efficient.

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 simple one-parameter quote lookup with rich annotations and an output schema, the description is mostly complete. The main missing element is explicit routing guidance among the many sibling market-data tools.

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 0%, but there is only one simple required parameter. The description compensates minimally by stating that ticker is a stock ticker symbol, which is adequate but not rich semantic guidance.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it gets a detailed stock quote and names the fields bid/ask, day range, and trading info. It is clearly distinct from generic price tools, though it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like get_stock_price or get_fast_info.

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 no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get_stock_price, get_fast_info, or get_market_summary. It only restates the argument and return contents, leaving tool selection ambiguous.

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