firestarter_my_markets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context beyond that: the ownership scope ('only markets you OWN'), the specific output fields, and the note that this is a listing operation. It also redundantly states 'Read-only' but does not contradict annotations. It does not discuss rate limits or error cases, so not a 5.

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?

Three concise sentences: the first states the core purpose and returns, the second gives use cases, and the third provides alternatives. Every sentence earns its place, and the main verb is front-loaded. There is no filler or 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with no output schema, this description is exceptionally complete. It covers purpose, ownership scope, exact output fields, when to use, and when not to use. No significant gaps remain for a tool of this complexity.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (no properties). Per the rubric, 0 params = baseline 4. The description adds no parameter syntax but clarifies the implicit scope ('your markets') and lists output fields, which is more than necessary for a parameterless tool.

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 starts with a specific verb+resource: 'List the community markets you OWN (created with firestarter_create_market)'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing ownership and enumerates the exact fields returned (program id, buyer-facing name, etc.). The explicit owner question 'what markets do I have?' leaves no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use scenarios: when an owner asks about their markets, needs a program_id for dependent tools, or wants an at-a-glance view. It also names alternatives for related use cases: 'For earnings use firestarter_market_earnings; to preview a community's public shelf use firestarter_market_preview.' This is textbook guidance.

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