Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• related_marketsB
  3.2/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses output structure and mentions the input relies on a canonical slug from lookup_entity, but does not discuss behavioral traits like rate limits, destructive nature, or authentication. Some transparency exists, but gaps remain.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is concise at three sentences, with the primary purpose front-loaded. No extraneous information. It could be slightly more structured, but is effective.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a tool with 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is fairly complete: it explains the type of results and their components. Lacks edge-case or error information, but sufficient given the simplicity.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes both parameters. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool finds markets/items exposed to an entity or topic, with specific output components (exposure type, strength score, reasons). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like entity_connections, but the purpose is unambiguous.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies a dependency on lookup_entity but does not explain when to choose related_markets over entity_connections or entity_signals.

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

• entity_signalsA
  3.9/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It implies read-only operation but does not disclose data freshness, pagination, or error handling. Lacks some behavioral context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences, front-loaded with key information, no wasted words. Highly efficient.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  No output schema, so description should detail return structure more. Lists components but lacks format details. Adequate but leaves some gaps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with clear description for 'slug'. Description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; baseline of 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description clearly states 'Get the current signal picture for an entity' with specific components (signal-quality score, sentiment, events). It distinguishes from sibling tools like entity_connections and lookup_entity by focusing on signals.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Provides explicit use case: 'check whether something is moving before acting on a connection.' This helps with when to use, though it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives.

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

• entity_connectionsA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that edges include relationship type, confidence score, and temporal validity, and mentions depth limits. Adequate for a read-only traversal.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, no filler. Every sentence provides essential information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  No output schema but description explains edge attributes. For a moderate-complexity tool with 3 params, the description is sufficiently complete without gaps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining 'typed relationships' and providing a usage example for depth, going beyond schema descriptions.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description states the tool retrieves typed relationship neighborhood with concrete examples (supplies, plays for, etc.), clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like lookup_entity and related_markets.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Provides explicit guidance on using depth 2 for second-order connections. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use but the context is clear enough.

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

• lookup_entityA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Discloses return contents: entity type, category, tags, key attributes with provenance and confidence. No annotations exist, so description bears full weight; it covers essential behavioral aspects for a read-only lookup.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences with no redundancy. First sentence states purpose and output; second provides usage guidance. Every word earns its place.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Fully adequate for a simple one-parameter tool with sibling tools described. Provides entry point guidance and output overview despite no output schema.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100% with a detailed example for the single 'query' parameter. The tool description reiterates the parameter purpose but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description clearly states verb and resource: 'Resolve a name, ticker, or topic to a canonical entity in the knowledge graph.' It also distinguishes from sibling tools by noting 'other tools take the returned slug.'

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly advises to 'Start here — other tools take the returned slug,' indicating this tool is the entry point for entity lookups before using siblings like entity_connections.

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