get_market_data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by disclosing the returned data content (share price, shares outstanding, market cap, beta), but says nothing about sourcing, latency, or freshness beyond the annotations. With annotations carrying the behavior burden, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

One tight sentence with no filler, and the most salient returned data is front-loaded. It is a fragment rather than a full sentence, but nothing is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly enumerates what is returned, and the read-only annotations cover safety. For a simple single-parameter retrieval tool this is nearly complete, only missing ticker format expectations and any usage context.

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 0% and the single required 'ticker' parameter is never mentioned in the description. Since the tool needs a ticker and the schema does not explain its format or expectations, the description should compensate but does not. Only the SEC reference hints tangentially at the domain.

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 lists the concrete data returned (share price, SEC cover-page shares outstanding, market cap, 5-year monthly beta), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_financials and get_filings. It is a noun-phrase field listing rather than a verb+resource sentence, and it never explicitly states 'retrieve market data,' but the content is specific enough for an agent to identify the tool.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus lookup_company, get_comps, or get_financials, nor any prerequisites or conditions. The agent must infer usage purely from the returned-field list.

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