stock_intraday

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

The description adds the temporal scope 'intraday (today's)', which is a useful behavioral constraint not evident from the tool name alone. However, with no annotations provided, it does not disclose pagination behavior, data granularity, or error handling, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 filler. It is concise, though slightly under-specified for a tool with multiple parameters and sibling alternatives.

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?

For a simple data retrieval tool, the description is minimally viable: it states the core purpose and leverages the schema and output schema for parameter and return details. However, it lacks usage guidance and does not clarify how this tool differs from closely related siblings, leaving room for improvement.

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%, with all parameters documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter context, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves intraday (today's) trading data for a stock, using a specific verb and resource. It implies a distinction from historical data, but does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like stock_history or stock_price_depth. The description only states what the tool does without any exclusions or contextual usage cues.

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