Weekend trading: available weekends & schedule

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: results are sorted 'newest first' and includeSchedule expands the payload with ~12 upcoming weekend/holiday sessions. It says nothing about pagination behavior or return size, which the limit/offset params imply 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 resource and selector role, then the optional schedule behavior. The parenthetical field list is dense but packs genuine information; very little waste overall.

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?

With no output schema and no nested objects, the description usefully compensates by enumerating the returned fields and status signals, and it explains the one non-obvious param (includeSchedule). Only pagination/ordering volume limits from limit/offset remain unaddressed, so it is close to complete for a read-only list tool.

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%, so limit/offset/fields are already documented and baseline is 3. The description clarifies includeSchedule's effect ('adds the next ~12 weekend/holiday sessions'), a modest addition beyond the schema's terse 'Also return the upcoming session schedule', but it does not touch the other three params.

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?

Names a specific resource (tracked weekends) with a detailed enumeration of the columns returned (fridayCloseTs week id, sundayCloseTs, status, avg % change, market count), so the agent knows exactly what this list tool yields. It is distinguishable from weekend_prices/positions/coin_changes by being the week-level selector. It stops short of naming a sibling explicitly, so it does not earn a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied: it is 'the /weekend-trading selector' and 'newest first', and includeSchedule is flagged as an optional addition. There is no explicit statement of when to reach for this versus flowscan_weekend_prices or the other weekend siblings, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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