get_stock_quote

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions the return fields (price, day change, percent change, currency) but does not disclose data source, latency, real-time vs delayed data, error handling, or rate limits. The description is adequate but lacks depth.

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 extremely concise with two short sections: a clear one-line purpose followed by parameter and return details. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers the main purpose and return values. An output schema exists, so return details may be further documented there. However, it lacks mention of error cases, prerequisites, or any prerequisites for use, which would enhance 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?

The schema has 0% coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'symbol' parameter as a ticker symbol with examples (AAPL, MSFT, SPY), adding meaning beyond the schema's bare type definition. Could be slightly more precise about case sensitivity or exchange, but overall helpful.

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 'Get the latest price for a stock or ETF', specifying the verb and resource. The tool distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_crypto_price' (crypto) and 'get_stock_history' (historical data) by focusing on current price retrieval for stocks and ETFs.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings. The description implies it's for stocks/ETFs but does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like 'analyze_stock' for deeper analysis.

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