get_markets

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

The description explicitly states the tool works without API keys, a key behavioral trait. No other behavioral details (e.g., rate limits, data freshness) are needed given the tool's simplicity. It does not contradict any annotations since none exist.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose. No redundant words. Every sentence adds value: the first states the function and included fields, the second notes an important access trait.

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 parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description is complete. It covers the purpose, return contents, and access requirements.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'exchange'. The description repeats the allowed values but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 gets all available perpetual futures markets on an exchange, and enumerates the included fields (price, funding rate, volume, max leverage). It also notes it works without API keys, making it distinct from sibling tools like get_prices or get_funding_rates.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the description implicitly positions it as a comprehensive overview tool, and siblings like get_prices or get_funding_rates are more specific. A clear recommendation or exclusion statement is missing.

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