get_operating_manual

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

With no annotations provided, the description serves as the primary transparency source. It discloses the tool is informational and enumerates the topics it covers (platform mechanics, freedoms, OTC vs real, data, workflow). It does not mention output format or length, but the presence of an output schema mitigates the need to describe return values.

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 compact yet information-dense. It front-loads the critical instruction 'READ THIS FIRST' and uses the rest of the sentence to enumerate covered topics without unnecessary 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 the tool is a manual, the description thoroughly outlines what the user will learn, covering platform, trading mechanics, tool inventory, constraints, and workflow. The existing output schema covers return format, so no further detail is necessary.

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 zero parameters, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description correctly focuses on content rather than arguments, earning the baseline score for parameterless tools.

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 uses the explicit verb 'Explains' and clearly identifies the resource as the platform operating manual. It lists specific content areas (PocketOption, binary options, tools, freedoms, OTC, data sourcing, workflow), which distinguishes it from sibling trading tools that perform actions rather than provide guidance.

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 explicitly instructs 'READ THIS FIRST' and 'Read it once before doing anything else,' establishing a clear when-to-use directive. It doesn't name alternative tools, but for a manual tool there are no direct alternatives; the instruction is sufficient.

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