get_markets

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

With no annotations, the description fully describes what the tool returns: base/quote currencies, fees as decimals, minimum order size, and fee tiers. This covers the behavioral aspect of the tool's output, though no mention of rate limits or auth, which is acceptable for a read-only list.

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 and an example question, with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return details completely. The single parameter is well-described. The tool's purpose is fully covered for an agent to use correctly.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear description of market_id as optional. The description adds an example ('BTC-CLP') and context about omitting it, enhancing understanding 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 the tool lists trading pairs or returns details for a specific market, using the verb 'lists' and specifying the resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_market_summary by focusing on a list of markets and detailed fees.

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?

Provides explicit guidance to omit market_id for all markets or provide it for a specific market. Includes an example question to clarify usage. No explicit when-not or alternatives mentioned, but the instruction is clear.

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