market_snapshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only lists output components and does not mention whether the operation is read-only, requires a valid symbol, or any potential error conditions. This is a significant gap for a data retrieval tool.

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 at six words, front-loaded with the key information, and free of filler. However, its noun-phrase structure is slightly abrupt but acceptable for such a simple tool.

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 output schema exists, return values are presumably covered. The description lists all data components, but for a tool with many siblings, it lacks context about when to select this snapshot view over other market data tools. For a single-parameter read operation, it is minimally acceptable but leaves gaps in 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%, meaning the description does not mention the 'symbol' parameter at all. The schema itself only provides a type and title, so the description fails to add meaning such as symbol format, case sensitivity, or usage context. It does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 states the tool provides a combined view of latest quote, daily bar, previous close, and change. It clearly identifies the data payload and the 'combined' nature distinguishes it from siblings like market_latest_quote and market_bars, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'retrieve'.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as market_latest_quote or market_bars. There is no explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name and description.

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