get_quote

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose that the quote is real-time and describes the return structure as a dict with one key per symbol. However, it does not mention error behavior, quote data fields, or any operational caveats.

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 well-structured with separate Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, and the purpose is front-loaded with no filler.

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 description covers the purpose, parameter semantics, and return shape. The only notable gap is that 'quote data' is not expanded into specific fields, and no output schema exists to fill that gap.

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 only defines 'symbol' as a string, but the description adds meaningful semantics: 'The ticker symbol to quote (e.g. "AAPL").' This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage and gives the agent a concrete example.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get a real-time quote for a single symbol.' The 'single symbol' scope clearly distinguishes it from the sibling get_quotes, and the purpose is immediately understandable.

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 'single symbol' phrasing implies when this tool is appropriate, and the sibling name get_quotes suggests the alternative, but the description never explicitly says 'for multiple symbols use get_quotes.' The guidance is left to inference rather than being stated.

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