fq_get_market_statistics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows the tool is safe and idempotent. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond listing the kind of data returned (market_cap, volume/value). No conflicts with annotations.

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 consists of two short sentences, directly stating the tool's purpose and a key usage recommendation. There is no unnecessary text, and the most critical information is front-loaded.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to explain the 5 parameters despite 0% schema coverage. The tool's purpose and sibling distinction are covered, but parameter documentation is missing, making the description incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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%, meaning none of the 5 parameters have descriptions in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level information, leaving the agent to infer meaning from names alone (e.g., 'metric', 'time_filter'). This is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 that the tool retrieves market statistics (market_cap, volume/value) and distinguishes it from fq_get_stock_prices for OHLCV data. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool lists or retrieves this data, relying on the tool name for the verb.

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 explicitly advises preferring fq_get_stock_prices for OHLCV data, indicating an alternative. It implies this tool is for market stats, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance beyond this single recommendation.

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