Get Market By Slug

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds nothing beyond that structure — no error behavior for missing slugs, no note on whether the response is a snapshot or live, and no hint about openWorld lookups returning empty results.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero waste, which is appropriate for a single-parameter getter. It is efficient but leaves no room for the disambiguation an agent could use.

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 one-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description is just barely sufficient. It omits any statement of the resource's shape or what a market identifier represents, which matters because several sibling tools operate on the same entity type.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single 'slug' parameter is documented, so the baseline is 3. The description only restates that the lookup is by slug, adding no format, casing, or validity information beyond the 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?

A specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('market') keyed on an explicit lookup field ('slug'), so an agent knows what it returns. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the closely related sibling get_market_by_id or from the broader get_markets list tool.

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?

No guidance on when to prefer this over get_market_by_id or get_markets; the agent must infer from the tool name that a slug lookup is required. No prerequisites, no mention of what to do when the slug is unknown, and no exclusions.

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