get_market

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only promises 'in detail' without explaining what fields are returned, whether it is a current snapshot, or what happens for invalid or missing keys.

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 compact sentence states the scope and provides illustrative examples with no filler. The most important information is front-loaded.

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?

Adequate for a simple single-parameter read tool: the schema covers the key parameter and examples clarify the format. However, without an output schema or explicit guidance on what 'detail' includes, an agent cannot fully predict the return shape or know when to prefer this over market_history.

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 schema already documents the 'key' parameter with 100% coverage. The description adds value by giving realistic key examples, including short-instrument formats like NVDA-SHORT, which clarifies the expected key shape beyond the generic schema text.

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 a single-market lookup by key, with concrete examples (NVDA, SPY, ETH, NVDA-SHORT). It distinguishes itself from list_markets by emphasizing 'one market' and from market_history by focusing on 'detail', though it does not explicitly say 'get' or name an alternative.

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 usage context is implied: use this when you need detailed information for one known market key. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like list_markets for overviews or market_history for time-series data.

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