quant_market_context

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by specifying the exact output fields and format, but does not introduce behavioral traits beyond what annotations imply.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence overview, a bullet list of content, and usage advice. Every sentence adds value, and the Returns section is clear.

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?

The description covers the output structure and usage context adequately. An output schema exists, so return values are not required. Minor gap: not explaining the breadth flag calculation in more detail, but sufficient for typical use.

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 has one parameter (params) with a description for response_format in the schema. However, the tool description only repeats 'Args: params (FormatInput): response_format' without adding any new meaning. With 0% schema description coverage (as per context signals), the description fails to compensate.

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 it provides 'Index/VIX/sector tape read for the current session' and lists specific data like SPY/QQQ/IWM day %, VIX, sector rankings, and breadth flag. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like quant_analyze_setup or quant_detect_regime.

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?

Explicitly advises using this tool 'before sizing any intraday trade' and mentions a common failure mode (trading breakouts against risk-off tape). It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear.

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