get_market_read

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

Discloses that it uses multiple data sources, returns AI-generated output, and includes pricing/payment details (x402 micropayment). This goes beyond annotations which only indicate read-only and open-world.

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?

Description is somewhat lengthy due to pricing details, but well-structured: purpose first, then indicators, output, and payment. Could be slightly more concise but still efficient.

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?

Fully describes the tool's purpose, inputs (none), outputs (listed), and usage constraints (pricing). With an output schema present, there's no gap in understanding return values.

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?

No parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds context about the output structure but doesn't need to explain parameters.

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?

Clearly states it's an AI-powered Korean crypto market analysis, listing specific indicators and what it returns (signal, confidence, summary, raw data). Distinguishes from sibling tools like get_kimchi_premium and get_fx_rate which focus on individual metrics.

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?

Does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_kimchi_premium or get_global_vs_korea_divergence. The description implies it for comprehensive analysis but lacks explicit guidance.

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