quote

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

The annotations already establish a safe, read-only, idempotent open-world operation, while “Live/last” adds some freshness context. The description does not clarify when a live quote versus a last quote is returned, or whether data can be delayed outside trading hours.

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 compact and front-loaded with the tool’s purpose, followed by a useful inventory of included metrics. The Persian parenthetical is brief and relevant to the tool’s symbol conventions.

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 one-parameter read tool, the input schema, safety annotations, and enumerated quote metrics provide enough information to invoke it correctly. With no output schema, the field list is valuable, though precise live/last behavior and sibling differentiation remain gaps.

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%, and the symbol parameter already explains that either a Persian symbol or an insCode is accepted. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that complete schema, so the baseline score 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 identifies a live/last quote and lists concrete outputs such as change percentage, VWAP, price limits, P/E, and market cap. It does not explicitly distinguish this current-quote view from siblings such as symbol_overview or market_snapshot.

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?

“Live/last quote” implies that the tool is for a current or most recent pricing snapshot. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over symbol_overview, market_snapshot, trades, or price_history.

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