Market Calendar Status

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive; the description adds that it is NYSE-calendar-based, deterministic, and explicitly avoids hallucinating market-open status. It also discloses what each view returns, which goes beyond the annotations alone.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses bulleted view explanations that are easy to scan. The closing Args section succinctly restates the parameter options without unnecessary detail.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers both views and their return semantics well. No critical invocation detail appears missing; the agent can correctly select the view and understand what to expect.

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 input schema only provides a default for the single `view` parameter, so the description carries the full burden. It names the two allowed values and their exact meanings, fully compensating for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 identifies the tool as a market-calendar reference and specifies exactly what each view returns: market open status, next open/close, holiday and early-close flags, or scan dates with signal counts. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_liquidity or get_daily_report by domain and resource.

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 clear context for choosing between the two views, naming the default and explaining what each view is for. It does not explicitly discuss when to use this tool instead of a sibling, but the use case is unambiguous from the description.

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