get_index

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns 'live data', implying a read-only operation with no side effects. While it does not contradict any annotations, it lacks details on rate limits, authorization, or data freshness.

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 efficient: two sentences front-load the data points and then list available indices. Every sentence adds essential information with no redundancy.

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 tool has only one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers the necessary context: what data is returned and which indices are supported. It is complete for a straightforward lookup tool.

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% for the single parameter 'index', which includes a description with examples. The description adds value by listing all available index values, extending beyond the schema's example list.

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 gets live data for a market index and enumerates specific data points (price, change, P/E, etc.), making its purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_quote or get_market_status by focusing on index-specific metrics.

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 a comprehensive list of available indices (NIFTY 50, SENSEX, etc.), which helps the agent know when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternative tools for related but different queries (e.g., individual stock quotes).

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