Map Financial Identifier to FIGI

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent). Description adds useful context: return fields, scale (300M+ instruments, 45K+ exchanges). No behavioral contradictions. Adds value beyond annotations.

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, front-loaded with core purpose and outputs. No redundant information. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

With output schema available, description covers return fields sufficiently. No missing essential info for a mapping tool. Scale and coverage provide helpful context.

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 coverage is 100%, so description's parameter info is supplementary. It mentions only 4 of 7 enum values for id_type and gives examples for id_value, but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema for exchange_code.

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?

Description clearly states the tool resolves financial identifiers to FIGI, listing input types and output fields. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'figi.finance.filter' or 'figi.finance.search', which would help agents choose.

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?

Description suggests using specific id_type values but lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., filter or search). No exclusions or context are provided, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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