list_futures_quotes

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds context about time-range filtering, which is useful beyond annotations. However, it doesn't disclose other behavioral traits like rate limits, pagination (implied by 'limit' parameter), or authentication needs, leaving gaps in transparency.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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 complexity (14 parameters, 0% schema coverage) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain parameter usage, behavioral details beyond annotations, or how it differs from siblings, making it inadequate for guiding an agent effectively.

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 0%, so parameters are undocumented in the schema. The description mentions 'time range' but doesn't explain the 14 parameters, including ticker, multiple timestamp filters, session dates, limit, sort, and params. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage, leaving most parameters ambiguous.

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 action ('Get quotes') and resource ('for a futures contract'), specifying the scope ('in a given time range'). It distinguishes from general quote tools by focusing on futures, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_futures_aggregates' or 'list_futures_trades' that might also involve futures data.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'list_futures_aggregates' for aggregated data or 'list_futures_trades' for trade data, nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions for usage.

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