get_market_overview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states what data is returned but does not disclose behavioral traits like data freshness (real-time vs. cached), rate limits, authentication needs, or error conditions. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists key metrics. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function without redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description provides basic purpose but lacks behavioral context (e.g., data sources, update frequency) and output details (e.g., format of risk distribution). It is minimally adequate but has clear gaps for a tool returning complex market data.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately does not discuss parameters, earning a baseline score of 4 for not adding unnecessary information.

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 specific action ('Get a high-level overview') and resource ('DeFi vault market'), listing concrete metrics (total TVL, vault count, risk distribution, TVL by protocol). It distinguishes from siblings like get_vault (single vault) or get_protocol_info (protocol-specific) by focusing on aggregate market data.

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 high-level market analysis, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_vault_risk_breakdown (detailed risk) or search_vaults (filtered vaults). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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