list_gmx_markets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It clearly states that the tool returns market labels and token addresses, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose potential behaviors like caching, pagination, or data freshness. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Two sentences with no extraneous words. The first sentence states what it does; the second provides usage guidance. Every sentence is valuable and contributes to understanding.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential information: what markets it lists (GMX V2 on Arbitrum) and what it returns (labels and addresses). It could be slightly more complete by noting any limitations, but it is sufficient for a simple read-only tool.

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 input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage (since there are none). The description adds no parameter information, but no parameters exist, so the baseline score of 4 is appropriate.

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 lists available GMX V2 perpetual markets on Arbitrum and returns market labels and token addresses. It uses a specific verb ('lists') and resource ('GMX V2 perpetual markets'), and none of the sibling tools perform this function, so it is well-distinguished.

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 advises using this tool 'before opening positions,' which provides clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, but the context is sufficient for an agent to understand its purpose.

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