get_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds context about requiring an active session and the option to specify a broker, but does not mention authentication, rate limits, or error behavior. The term 'live' indicates real-time data, which is useful but limited.

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 a single sentence that is direct and front-loaded. No redundant or irrelevant information is present, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 quote tool, the description provides the core purpose and broker context, but lacks information about return format, error conditions, or requirements like authentication. Given no output schema, the description could offer more details, but it is adequate for basic use.

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 already documents the parameters. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what is in the schema, such as the meaning of symbols or broker. 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('live market quotes'), clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like get_orders or get_portfolio. It also specifies the context of 'active or specific broker in your session', which adds clarity.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: retrieving live quotes from the active broker or a specified broker. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the scenario is well-defined. Sibling tools like get_technical_indicators are not mentioned, so no explicit guidance on choosing between them.

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