data_fetch_stock_data_batch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that it 'fetches data for multiple stocks in a single call' and includes an irrelevant implementation detail about SRP. There is no information on error handling, rate limits, caching, or return format, which is insufficient for a tool with no 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?

The description consists of three sentences. The first two are concise and relevant. The third sentence about 'Single Responsibility Principle' is an implementation detail that does not help an AI agent and could be removed. It is not overly long but has minor waste.

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?

The tool fetches multiple tickers in batch, which is moderately complex. The description mentions efficiency but lacks details on output format, error handling, or limits (e.g., maximum tickers). An output schema exists but is not shown; the description could still add context on typical behavior.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It reinforces efficiency for multiple tickers but does not clarify constraints or format beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states 'Fetch historical data for multiple tickers efficiently', specifying the verb (fetch), resource (historical data), and scope (multiple tickers). It also explicitly distinguishes from siblings like fetch_stock_data by highlighting efficiency, which helps the agent select the appropriate tool.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'more efficient than calling fetch_stock_data multiple times'. It does not mention scenarios where batch fetching is not suitable or any prerequisites, but the core usage context is clear.

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