webquik_get_security_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it delivers almost nothing: it never states that this is a read-only lookup, whether it hits the network, or how 'static' parameters differ from live quote data. The only hint is the word 'static', which is not explained.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the cause of the missing parameter and usage detail.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but the definition still omits parameter meaning, read-only behavior, and any routing versus sibling tools. For a two-required-parameter tool with zero schema coverage, this leaves the agent under-equipped.

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 description mentions no parameters at all, leaving class_code and sec_code completely undocumented in both places. For a tool that cannot be invoked without a class/security pair, that is a real gap rather than a schema-does-the-work situation.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('static parameters for a security') and gives concrete examples (lot size, price step), so the agent knows exactly what data comes back. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling webquik_search_securities, which an agent might reach for instead.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as webquik_search_securities or webquik_get_quotes. The agent must infer the retrieval workflow entirely from the name.

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