Idx Stockbit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, but it only says 'gateway' and 'unified,' which is architectural positioning rather than behavioral detail. It does not disclose dispatch semantics, side effects, response behavior, or error handling.

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 sentence and front-loads its core role as a 'single-entry gateway.' It is not bloated, though 'unified' and 'single-entry' are somewhat redundant.

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?

With ten siblings, five of which mirror the action enum exactly, the description leaves the relationship between idx_stockbit and those endpoint-specific tools ambiguous. The output schema mitigates the need to explain return values, but usage context and behavioral expectations are still missing, making the definition incomplete.

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 100%; the action parameter enumerates its allowed values and ticker includes examples, so the schema already carries the semantic load. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the input schema provides.

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 identifies the tool as a 'single-entry gateway' to 'all Stockbit intelligence endpoints,' which communicates that it is a dispatcher rather than an endpoint-specific operation. This is clear and distinguishes it from sibling tools, though it lacks a concrete action verb and does not enumerate the covered endpoints.

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 phrase 'single-entry gateway for all...' implies this is the umbrella tool to use for Stockbit intelligence, but it never explicitly says when to prefer it over the individual sibling endpoints such as idx_get_orderbook or idx_get_keystats. There is no when-not or alternative guidance, so the usage context is only implied.

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