Get Market Snapshot

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral details beyond annotations: units (CAD/MWh, MW), timezone (America/Edmonton), and that it provides 'recent' data, which clarifies data freshness expectations without contradicting any annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then adds concise units/timezone info. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only snapshot tool with an output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what is returned, units, timezone, and the 'current-state' nature. It does not need to explain return values because the output schema covers that.

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 tool has zero parameters, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description focuses on the output content and units, which is sufficient given the empty input schema.

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 clearly states the tool returns a 'cohesive current-state view' of the Alberta electricity market and lists specific components (pool price, SMP, load, generation, interchange, reserves), distinguishing it from sibling tools that 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?

The description implies this is a broad aggregate snapshot for getting an overview, but it does not explicitly say when to use it instead of the more specific sibling tools or mention any exclusions. The context is clear but lacks explicit differentiation guidance.

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