get_market_pulse

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It outlines the return format (JSON) and data categories but does not address data freshness, caching, authentication requirements, or any potential delays. This is adequate for a simple read-only tool but lacks depth.

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 concise and well-structured, using bullet points to list data categories. Every sentence serves a purpose, with no redundant or vague phrasing.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no annotations, but has an output schema), the description is complete. It explains the tool's purpose, the data returned, and the return format, which is sufficient for an agent to use it 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter details. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description appropriately omits parameter information.

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 provides a market overview with specific major indices, VIX, sector ETFs, and top movers. It uses a specific verb-resource combination and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like analyze_stock and get_earnings_iv_plays by focusing on a broad market snapshot.

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 the tool is for a quick snapshot of market conditions but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusion criteria, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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