listing_all_symbols

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves all symbols, but it does not mention data freshness, pagination, or any other runtime behavior. For a simple read-only listing, this is adequate but does not add extra context beyond the basic function.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose without extraneous information. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

The presence of an output schema and sibling tool names provides sufficient context for an agent to understand what the tool returns and how it compares to alternatives. The description is complete for selecting the tool, though it does not elaborate on the source parameter's impact on results.

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 already describes the single parameter 'source' with its default and possible values (VCI or KBS), giving 100% coverage. The description does not add any additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'all listed stock symbols on Vietnamese exchanges (HOSE, HNX, UPCOM)'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like listing_symbols_by_exchange and listing_symbols_by_group by explicitly covering all exchanges and the full set of symbols.

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 'all listed stock symbols' implies using this tool when a complete list is needed, which differentiates it from siblings that filter by exchange or group. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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