Search Indian Stocks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: relevance ranking order (exact symbol > prefix > contains), alias matching behavior, and the scope of ~8,200 stocks. It doesn't mention pagination or rate limits, but the ranking and alias details go beyond annotations.

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 core purpose, then adds ranking behavior and usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place, and the follow-up suggestion is a natural extension without bloat.

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 search tool with no output schema, the description covers what it searches, how results are ranked, and what to do after. It doesn't describe the result format, but the tool's purpose is clear enough for an agent to call it correctly. The follow-up suggestions add practical completeness.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds context about what query can contain (name, symbol, BSE code, ISIN) and alias examples, but doesn't add much beyond the schema for limit, sector, and industry. Baseline 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 searches ~8,200 Indian stocks by name, symbol, BSE code, or ISIN, and explicitly mentions alias matching. It distinguishes itself from siblings by saying 'Use this FIRST to find a stock's symbol before calling other 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?

The description explicitly says to use this tool first to find a stock's symbol before calling other tools, and provides follow-up suggestions (get_company_profile, get_stock_quote, add_to_watchlist). This gives clear when-to-use guidance and routes the agent to alternatives.

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