Pull the current Market Mood for a single ticker — its history, how often the mood has shifted, and any patterns we've spotted. Educational only. Mood snapshots refresh on a daily cycle and can lag the latest close by one session; use get_close_history for the freshest price.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ticker | Yes | Ticker symbol (e.g. AAPL, TSLA, BTC-USD) | |
| history_limit | No | History points to include, default 60 |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent safety, and the description adds valuable context beyond that: 'Educational only,' the daily refresh cycle, and the potential one-session lag versus the latest close. This discloses important behavioral nuances the agent would not otherwise know.
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, front-loads the core purpose, and every clause adds meaningful information: scope, content, educational nature, freshness caveat, and an alternative. No wasted words.
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 rich annotations, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description provides enough context to understand what to expect: current mood, historical view, shift frequency, and spotted patterns. It also sets expectations about data freshness and limitations, making it complete for safe selection and invocation.
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%, with both ticker and history_limit described in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies without needing compensation.
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 opens with 'Pull the current Market Mood for a single ticker,' which states a specific verb, resource, and scope. It also lists the returned content (history, mood shifts, patterns), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like list_market_moods or get_today_mood_changes.
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 notes the daily refresh lag and directs users to get_close_history for fresher price data, giving a clear exclusion for price needs. However, it does not name alternative mood-focused tools or explicitly state when to choose this over list_market_moods/get_today_mood_changes, though 'single ticker' implies the scope.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
With 57 tools, most have distinct purposes (market data, journaling, watchlists). A few related tools (get_price_alignment vs get_crypto_price_alignment, get_market_pulse vs get_market_movers) could cause miselection, but descriptions clarify asset types and scope.
Tools predominantly use get_/list_/create_/update_/delete_ verbs with clear noun suffixes. Minor deviations like start_here, whoami, add_to_watchlist, and remove_from_watchlist break the pure verb_noun pattern, but the style is consistent and readable.
At 57 tools, the server is far beyond the well-scoped range. While the domain is broad, this many tools will overwhelm an agent's capability to select accurately, and many could be consolidated (e.g., separate financial statements).
The server covers watchlist CRUD, trading journaling, market data (fundamentals, statements, news, transcripts), analysis tools, and community features. No obvious dead ends; lifecycle coverage is thorough for the described domain.
