Broker Queue

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, which cover safety and repeatability. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., latency, data staleness) beyond stating it retrieves data. It is consistent with annotations, so no contradiction.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise. However, the lack of detail makes it minimally informative; every word is present but not optimally valuable.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description still lacks context about what 'broker queue data' represents and how it differs from other broker-related endpoints. The agent may struggle to understand the semantic meaning without additional hints.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the sole parameter 'symbol', including an example. The description does not add any additional meaning or constraints beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for a fully covered 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 'Get broker queue data' uses a specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource 'broker queue'. However, it fails to clarify what 'broker queue data' refers to, leaving the tool's purpose somewhat vague. Among siblings, broker_holding and similar tools exist, but the description does not distinguish the unique nature of a 'broker queue'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like broker_holding or broker_holding_daily. There is no mention of appropriate contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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