get_stocks

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true and destructive=false, so no contradiction. The description adds operational context: a limit of 200 symbols and the comma-separated format with an example. This goes beyond what annotations provide, though it does not cover error handling or data latency.

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?

Two sentences, direct, and no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, followed by parameter details. Every sentence earns its place.

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 lookup tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete: it names the returned fields and the input constraints. A minor gap is the lack of explicit 'when to use' relative to sibling tools, but the purpose is clear enough.

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 provides only a type and no description, so the 0% schema coverage puts the burden on the description. The description explains the expected comma-separated format, provides an example, and specifies the maximum number of symbols, which is essential for using the parameter correctly.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource 'reference info' and enumerates the data fields returned, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_prices or get_orderbook by the nature of the data (static reference versus market 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 (when you need reference data), but does not explicitly state exclusions or mention alternative tools for real-time data, such as 'for current prices, use get_prices.' It relies on inference rather than explicit guidance.

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