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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds 'Descriptive, not a recommendation' and detailed cost/quota information (5/day anonymous, 10/day signed-in, 50/day power, $0.02 per call beyond). This is useful behavioral disclosure, though it doesn't detail response format or error behavior.

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 somewhat long but every sentence adds value: purpose, usage tip, pairing, non-recommendation disclaimer, and cost details. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and remains focused without repetition.

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 tool with one optional parameter, no required input, and a read-only annotation, the description covers purpose, usage, behavior, cost, and pairing. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to decide and call it 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 sole parameter 'sections' is explained in the schema, but the description adds meaning by listing what each section contains (summary, fear_greed, sectors, rotation, news) and reiterates the 'pick fewer' guidance. This goes beyond the bare enum list in the schema.

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 that the tool provides 'Today's market conditions' with specific components: narrative, fear & greed index, sector scores, rotation, cycle phase, and news. This is a specific verb+resource and is easily distinguished from sibling tools about watchlists and smart lists.

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 explicitly pairs the tool with get_my_watchlist for a specific use case, and advises picking sections to keep answers small. It provides clear context on when to use it, though it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it.

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