Get Market

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully explains sellerUserId semantics and the instant-buy path via place_offer, but it omits auth requirements, pagination, and whether league_id null means all leagues or a default scope.

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 short and front-loaded: the first sentence states what the tool returns, and the second adds the important sellerUserId nuance. Every 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?

The output schema reduces the need to explain return values, and the description covers key listing semantics well. However, it leaves the sole input parameter unexplained and provides no sibling-routing guidance, so an agent cannot fully resolve how to call it correctly in context.

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, league_id, is completely undocumented in both the schema and description. The description never explains what league_id scopes, what null means, or how the market is filtered.

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 identifies the resource and scope: players currently on the transfer market, including price, expiry, and offers. It does not explicitly distinguish this listing tool from siblings like get_market_player or search_players, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied by 'currently on the transfer market,' and the description helpfully notes that Kickbase-listed players can be bought via place_offer. However, it does not say when to use get_market versus get_market_player, search_players, or analyze_transfer_market.

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