stock_quote

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: real-time nature with 15-minute delay, supported exchanges (NYSE/NASDAQ/global), and the data points returned (price, volume, change %). It doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement followed by parameter explanations. The two-sentence format is efficient, though the parameter section could be slightly more concise by combining the ticker/symbol relationship into one sentence.

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 moderate complexity, no annotations, and an output schema (which handles return values), the description is quite complete. It covers purpose, behavioral context, and parameter semantics adequately, though it could benefit from mentioning any limitations or prerequisites.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining both parameters: ticker as the stock symbol with examples (AAPL, TSLA, MSFT, NVDA) and symbol as an alias for ticker. It clarifies the relationship between them (use either) which isn't evident from the schema alone.

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 the tool's purpose: retrieving real-time stock price, volume, and change percentage for specific tickers. It specifies the scope (NYSE/NASDAQ/global) and distinguishes itself from siblings like crypto_price and economic_indicator by focusing on traditional stock data.

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 description implies usage for stock tickers only, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like company_fundamentals or sec_filing. There's no guidance about when not to use it or what specific use cases it serves best.

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