Get Sampling Markets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only reveals that the selection is random, but omits any mention of pagination (next_cursor parameter), response format, or whether it is a read-only operation. This is insufficient for an agent to understand 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 a single short sentence with no fluff, but it is under-specified. For a tool with one undocumented parameter and no annotations, this is not appropriately sized; it omits critical usage and parameter information that could be conveyed in just a few more words.

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?

The tool has one parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, so the description must explain the tool's role and the cursor parameter. It does neither, leaving the agent without a clear understanding of how to invoke the tool or interpret results. The existence of similar siblings further increases the need for more context.

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 0% and the tool description provides no explanation for the 'next_cursor' parameter. The parameter's purpose (likely pagination) is completely undocumented, so the description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of semantics.

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 clear action ('Get') and resource ('markets') with the modifier 'random sample', which distinguishes it from list_markets or query_markets. However, it does not specify the sample size or whether it supports pagination, and it does not differentiate from the sibling tool get_sampling_simplified_markets.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without information to choose between this and sibling tools like list_markets or get_sampling_simplified_markets.

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