Get Market Metrics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's burden is lower. The description adds behavioral context by listing the computed metrics returned (volume averages, volatility, SMAs, trend direction), which is consistent with the read-only nature. No contradictions.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's action and output, and every sentence adds value. No redundant or missing 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 has a single required parameter (with clear schema), an output schema (not shown but flagged true), and clear sibling differentiation, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage context, and expected outputs.

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 100% (the ticker parameter has a description). The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides for the parameter, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it 'Get[s] computed market metrics for a company' and lists specific metrics (volume averages, volatility, SMAs, trend direction). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_quote by noting it goes 'beyond the basic quote', making its specific purpose unambiguous.

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 provides context for when to use: 'Use when analyzing trading patterns or technical indicators beyond the basic quote.' This implies alternatives (like get_quote for basic quotes) and sets clear context, though it does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use.

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