ig_get_market

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation with no side effects, but the description does not mention rate limits, data delays, authentication requirements, or error behavior. It adds minimal transparency beyond the simple read nature.

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 a single sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose. Every word adds value, and there is no redundant repetition of the tool name or schema details.

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 tool is simple with one parameter, an output schema, and no annotations. The description states the core purpose but lacks context about how the epic is obtained or how this tool fits into the broader IG trading workflow. It is not misleading, but it is minimal and does not fully support an agent in selecting the tool correctly.

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 required parameter 'epic' with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description only identifies the parameter as an 'instrument epic,' which gives it a name but does not explain the format, how to obtain it, or provide examples. Given the lack of schema documentation, the description fails to adequately 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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('instrument epic'), and enumerates what is retrieved (dealing rules, snapshot, details). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ig_search_markets, which is for finding markets rather than retrieving a specific market's details.

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?

Usage is implied: you need an epic to fetch market details. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention that the epic would typically come from a search operation. The description provides no exclusions or alternative tool references.

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