betr_market_movers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the return structure and that it lists runners with price changes. It fails to disclose whether the data is live or historical, any access restrictions, or state-changing behavior. This is insufficient for a tool with no safety annotations.

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 consists of two concise sentences: the first clearly states the tool's purpose, the second specifies the return structure. No extraneous words; every sentence adds value.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description provides the return structure but omits contextual details such as the time range of movers (e.g., current day, live), frequency of updates, or scope (e.g., all racing venues). It is minimally complete but could be enhanced.

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% (empty schema). Per guidelines, a parameter count of 0 sets a baseline of 4. The description adds value by describing the output, but no parameter documentation is needed.

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 tool name and description clearly indicate it provides racing market movers—runners whose fixed prices are shortening/drifting. The verb 'returns' and resource 'market movers' are specific and distinct from sibling tools like betr_race or betr_race_flucs.

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 states what the tool does but offers no explicit guidance on when to use it versus other similar tools (e.g., betr_race_flucs for price fluctuations). The purpose is implied but without exclusions or alternatives, limiting its usefulness for an AI agent navigating many sibling tools.

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