listing_symbols_by_exchange

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It accurately describes a read-only listing operation, but offers no additional behavioral context such as data source differences, pagination, or limitations. The description is truthful but minimal.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core functionality.

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 description is largely complete for a simple listing tool, especially since an output schema exists. It lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives, but the core purpose and parameters are adequately covered.

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 complete coverage for the single parameter 'source', including a description and default value. The tool description does not add further semantic detail, 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 tool's function: retrieving stock symbols grouped by exchange, with specific exchanges listed (HOSE, HNX, UPCOM). This verb+resource+scope structure distinguishes it from siblings like listing_all_symbols and listing_symbols_by_group.

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 clear context—use this tool when you need symbols organized by exchange. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is self-evident among sibling tools.

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