Retrieve FX market session timetables and overlap windows for Sydney, Tokyo, London, and New York, with optional snapshot at a specific UTC timestamp.
Get the current FX market-session timetable and overlap windows, or request a snapshot for a specific UTC timestamp. Covers Sydney, Tokyo, London, and New York sessions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| at | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explains the tool returns a timetable and overlap windows, and that it can take a timestamp for a snapshot, which is good. However, it does not state that the operation is read-only (though implied), nor does it mention any potential side effects, rate limits, or output format specifics beyond what the output schema would convey.
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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary function, and every word adds value. No fluff or repetition.
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 and an output schema present, the description is largely complete. It covers the main behavior and parameter semantics, though it could mention default behavior more explicitly (e.g., that omitting 'at' returns current timetable) – but that is already implied by the phrasing.
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 has zero description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining that the 'at' parameter is a UTC timestamp for requesting a snapshot, which adds meaning beyond the bare schema (string/null). However, it does not specify the exact timestamp format (e.g., ISO 8601), leaving some 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: retrieving the FX market-session timetable and overlap windows, either current or at a specific UTC timestamp. It names the specific sessions covered (Sydney, Tokyo, London, New York), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle other data types like forex rates 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?
The description implies when to use the tool (when FX market session information is needed) and explains the two modes (current vs. timestamp snapshot), but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. Since siblings are thematically different, the purpose is clear enough, but explicit routing guidance is absent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.