get_market_environment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden; it does state that the tool retrieves current market environment data and gives examples, implying a read-only operation. However, it lacks detail about output structure, data vintage, or any limitations.

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?

A single senence with the action first and concrete examples in parentheses—no filler, easy to parse.

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 2-parameter getter with clear enum schemas, the description plus schema cover the essentials. Yet with no output schema, it could mention what kind of values or shape the agent should expect.

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 coverage is 100% with enums already describing region and timeframe. The description lists example indicators but doesn't add meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 identifies a specific action ('現在の市場環境...を取得') and lists concrete indicators (金利、ドル円、NYダウ、VIX). It communicates the tool's domain but does not explicitly distinguish it from broader siblings like get_financial_data, so it misses the 5 criteria.

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 choose this tool over get_financial_data, get_stock_price, or others. The description implies macro-market use but doesn't state its specific role or exclusions.

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