get_index_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states the tool returns 'current index price with daily change percentage', which is transparent. It does not mention potential edge cases like data freshness or error handling, but for a simple read operation it is sufficient.

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 yet complete. It includes a one-line summary, usage context, a formatted list of symbols with mappings, and structured Args/Returns sections. No word is wasted.

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 is fully complete. It covers what the tool does, when to use it, valid inputs, and what is returned. No gaps remain.

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 one required parameter 'symbol' with 0% description coverage. The description compensates thoroughly by listing valid symbols, their alternate names, and the market each represents. This provides essential meaning that the schema alone lacks.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Get current quote for a stock index'. It lists specific supported symbols (US30, SPX, NASDAQ) and distinguishes itself from siblings like get_price (crypto) and get_index_candles (candles).

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 context: 'Use this to check traditional market conditions... BTC often correlates with US stock indices.' It suggests when to use this tool versus crypto-specific tools. However, it could explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for crypto quotes).

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