cftc_products

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral context by stating the tool lists/discover products and supports keyword search for specific commodities, currencies, or financial instruments. It does not contradict the annotation and discloses the primary behavior without unnecessary warnings.

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 three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage context and search guidance. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter, no output schema, and read-only annotation, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and how to use the search parameter. It also connects to sibling COT report tools via the 'before querying COT reports' note, completing the 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single 'search' parameter, which already provides example keywords. The description adds the phrase 'commodities, currencies, or financial instruments' to clarify the types of markets, but this is largely redundant with the schema's examples. The baseline of 3 applies since the schema handles the parameter documentation.

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 'List available products and markets tracked by CFTC' with a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes the tool's purpose by explaining it is used to 'discover market names before querying COT reports,' which sets it apart from sibling COT report tools.

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 explicitly says 'Use to discover market names before querying COT reports,' giving clear context for when to use it. However, it does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or name alternative tools, only implying the relationship to COT report queries.

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