get_index_overview

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description receives the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that this is a read operation, what the response looks like, or any other behavioral expectations. The noun-phrase description offers only conceptual content, not behavior.

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 extremely concise with no filler. The flow mapping is front-loaded and every word contributes to understanding the tool.

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, and the description makes it minimally usable. However, with no output schema or annotations, the return shape, field names, and expected usage context remain implicit. An agent can guess the general purpose but not the exact output or when to prefer this over sibling market tools.

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 schema only provides an integer range and default, while the description meaningfully maps 1 to bourse and 2 to fara-bourse. This adds real semantic value despite not defining 'fara-bourse' in more detail.

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 identifies a clear resource: 'Market overview / index values', and the flow parameter adds scope. However, it lacks an explicit verb and does not differentiate from siblings like market_status or get_market_watch.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The flow mapping is parameter information, not usage context or exclusion criteria.

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