strata_marketsList active Strata markets and view current Sonar quote availability to identify where live pricing is offered.
List Strata markets and their current Sonar quote availability.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| includePaused | No | Include markets whose public Sonar quote operation is paused. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the context that availability is 'current', implying live data, but does not disclose response format or any edge cases.
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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.
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 optional parameter and no output schema, but the description does not clarify the return structure or what 'Sonar quote availability' entails. Given the lack of an output schema, a bit more detail about response data would improve completeness.
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 only parameter (includePaused) is fully documented in the schema with a clear description, and schema coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('Strata markets') plus a distinguishing aspect ('current Sonar quote availability'). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like strata_quote and strata_capabilities.
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 provided on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools (strata_capabilities, strata_quote). It does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.