get_market_summary

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

With no annotations, the description fully explains the output: last price, bid/ask, spread %, volume, changes, and liquidity rating with threshold logic. It does not disclose rate limits or permissions, but it adequately describes the tool's behavior.

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 sentences long, front-loads the purpose, lists key return fields, and includes an example. No redundant information.

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 simple input schema and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool returns and includes logic for derived fields. It omits explicit output format, but overall completeness is good.

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 single parameter (market_id) has 100% schema description coverage. The description adds value by providing an example and clarifying the parameter's format, going beyond the schema.

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 it provides a one-call summary of a market including price, bid/ask, spread %, volume, changes, and liquidity rating. It distinguishes from siblings by recommending it as the best first tool for specific market queries.

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 'Best first tool to call when a user asks about any specific market,' providing clear usage context. It lacks mention of when not to use it or alternatives, but the guidance is strong for the intended use.

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