search_ticker

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clearly indicates a read/search operation with no side effects, stating 'Returns matching tickers...' which implies idempotency. No contradictions.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary action and immediately conveys the tool's value. Every sentence 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (no output schema, no nested objects), the description fully explains what it does, how to use it, and what to expect in the response. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters, and the description adds value by explaining the query parameter accepts 'company name, keyword, or partial symbol' and describes the output beyond the schema. This enriches the semantic meaning.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Search for stock or cryptocurrency ticker symbols' and specifies input types (company name, keyword, partial symbol) and output details. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like get_quote which operate on known tickers.

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 indicates the tool is 'useful for finding the correct ticker symbol when you know the company name,' providing clear context for when to use it. While it doesn't explicitly exclude other scenarios, the sibling tools naturally cover alternatives.

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