TradingView-only: global market snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and usefully discloses the single-source TradingView constraint plus the output envelope labeled `TRADINGVIEW`. It does not discuss freshness, delay, or rate limits, but it provides the key source-reliability caveat for a read-only snapshot.

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 short, front-loaded with the purpose, and moves cleanly through source limitation, alternative tool, and return grouping. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given zero parameters, an existing output schema, and no annotations, the description provides enough context to call the tool correctly: asset coverage, source limitation, alternative for verified indices, and return envelope labeling.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline score of 4 applies.

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 states a specific resource and scope: a global snapshot covering FX, crypto, index, and ETF data, sourced exclusively from TradingView. It also distinguishes the tool from `market_indices`, so an agent can identify its role without opening the schema.

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?

It explicitly names `market_indices` as the alternative for a cross-verified index read and explains why: Finviz covers only four US indices, making the broad snapshot single-source. That gives a clear condition for choosing the sibling tool over this one.

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