Analyze Supply Surplus Events

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

Beyond the read-only and idempotent annotations, the description adds important behavioral caveats: durations are only reported when the official sequence provides an explicit end boundary, and results are descriptive associations, not causation. These are meaningful constraints for interpreting the output.

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?

Two sentences carry the core purpose and key caveats with no filler. The primary operation is front-loaded, and each sentence earns its place.

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 a complete input schema and an output schema, the description covers the central purpose and the main behavioral caveats. It does not detail how missing official sequences affect the overall result beyond duration reporting, but this is a minor gap for an analysis tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%: both start and end parameters are fully described with timezone and inclusivity/exclusivity semantics. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, so the baseline score of 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 states a specific analytical operation: aligning official AESO supply-surplus status runs with observed Pool Price, AIL, and wind/solar generation. This clearly distinguishes the tool from raw data retrieval siblings like get_supply_surplus and other market analysis tools.

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 gives a clear context: use when a bounded descriptive comparison of official surplus status against observed market and generation data is needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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