get_market_pulse

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 mentions 'real-time' but does not specify caching, rate limits, authentication requirements, or response structure. For a tool with zero annotations, more behavioral context is needed.

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?

A single sentence effectively front-loads the action and enumerates specific data categories and time frames. Every phrase earns its place with no extraneous information.

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 simple tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the data scope and time frames adequately. However, it omits response format details and does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_market_brief', which would help the agent decide when to use it.

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 no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% trivially. Baseline is 4 for zero-parameter tools. The description adds value by explaining the output categories and time frames, which goes beyond the empty schema.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Get real-time market activity overview' and specifies the categories (funding totals, acquisition counts, etc.) and time frames (past 7 and 30 days). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_events' or 'get_market_brief' which likely focus on different aspects.

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 implies usage for a broad market overview, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_market_brief' or 'get_events'. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided, leaving the agent to infer context.

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