Get market rules

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden and does so well by explaining the dual behavior (catalog vs. markdown fetch), citing the source endpoint, and giving concrete example slugs. It does not cover invalid-slug behavior or errors, but the main behavior is transparent.

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?

Two dense sentences with no filler. The key usage pattern is front-loaded and every phrase adds value: source, dual mode, and concrete examples.

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 one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation behavior and return type (markdown). It is complete enough for an agent to call correctly, though a note about invalid slugs or error handling would make it stronger.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful semantics: the slug is optional, omitting it changes behavior to listing the catalog, and passing it fetches markdown. This goes beyond the schema's example-only parameter description.

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 retrieving agent-facing market semantics/rules and distinguishes the two modes: listing the catalog or fetching markdown for a specific slug. It is specific about the resource and usage, though it does not explicitly name or differentiate sibling tools such as get_margin_model.

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 gives clear context on how to use the tool: omit slug to list the catalog, pass a slug to fetch markdown. It does not state when not to use it or mention alternative sibling tools, but the usage pattern is explicit and easy to follow.

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