stock_quote_batch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get real-time quotes' conveys a non-destructive read operation and implies freshness, which is useful. However, it does not disclose batch size limits, symbol validation behavior, or partial failure handling—important behavioral context for an agent.

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 short sentences deliver the core action and input format with no filler. The most important operative detail—batch quote retrieval—is front-loaded, and every word 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 single-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description plus schema is largely sufficient. It communicates the batch scope and input format, distinguishing it from the single-stock sibling. Minor omissions like rate limits or maximum symbol count prevent a 5.

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%, so the schema fully documents the single 'symbols' parameter, including an example. The description's 'Symbols separated by commas' matches the schema without adding new meaning, so the baseline of 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies both the resource ('real-time quotes') and the key scope ('multiple stocks'). This clearly distinguishes it from the single-symbol sibling stock_quote while remaining distinct from kline, market_status, and market_summary.

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 establishes clear use context: call this tool when you need real-time quotes for several stocks, and separate symbols by commas. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, so it falls short of a 5, but the intended usage is unambiguous.

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