get_stock_data_v2

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It conveys a read operation and hints at optional inclusions, but it does not mention output structure, side effects, rate limits, or behavior when flags are false. The output schema helps with return shape but not with behavioral context.

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 front-loaded sentence that leads with the core purpose and then lists optional variations. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary context.

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 presence of an output schema, return-value details are covered elsewhere. However, the description lacks usage guidance and sufficient elaboration on the optional data categories, making it minimally adequate but not fully self-sufficient for an agent deciding between this and sibling tools.

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 low at 25%, with only 'symbol' documented. The description adds some meaning by mapping the boolean flags to 'statements, analysis and calendar data,' which helps associate include_financials, include_analysis, and include_calendar, but it stops short of explaining what each included dataset contains.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Get stock metadata' plus optional statements, analysis, and calendar data. It is specific enough to distinguish the tool from historical-data and options-chain siblings by resource type, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_historical_data_v2 or get_options_chain_v2. The phrase 'stock metadata' implies a use case, but the description does not state selection criteria or mention sibling tools.

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