get_market_hours

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'market-session hours' but does not explain return format, timezone handling, behavior for invalid dates, or whether both regular and after-hours sessions are included. Minimal detail beyond the tool name.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core action. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 the low complexity (2 params, no output schema), the description is quite minimal. It lacks performance expectations, edge cases, and any context on what constitutes a 'market session.' While not a complex tool, the sparse description leaves several important gaps for an AI agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does add meaning for the 'date' parameter by indicating it accepts an ISO date and is optional. However, the 'markets' parameter is only implied by the phrase 'market-session hours' with no explanation of expected values or format, leaving significant ambiguity.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('market-session hours'). It also notes the optional ISO date parameter, distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle quotes, transactions, or indicators.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply states what it does without mentioning context, prerequisites, or exclusions. Sibling tool names are listed but not referenced.

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