fq_ticker_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., error handling, data freshness). Bar lowered by annotations but description still adds minimal value.

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?

Extremely short (3 words), which is efficient but lacks any elaboration. While not verbose, it could be more informative without significant bloat.

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 is simple, has an output schema, and strong annotations, the bare description might be adequate. However, for a tool with many similar siblings, more context about what 'basic metadata' includes would improve completeness.

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%, so description must add meaning. It says 'for one ticker' which loosely implies the `ticker` parameter identifies the subject, but this is obvious from the param name. No details on ticker format, validation, or range are provided.

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 'Basic metadata for one ticker' identifies the resource (ticker) and scope (single), but lacks an action verb (e.g., 'get', 'retrieve'). It distinguishes from `fq_list_tickers` (multiple tickers) but overlaps with `fq_get_basic_info`, so clarity is moderate.

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?

No guidance when to use this tool versus alternatives like `fq_get_basic_info` or `fq_get_equity_snapshot`. No when-not, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.

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