get_session_plan

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

With no annotations, the description partially compensates by stating it returns key levels, behavior windows, and actionable setups. However, it does not disclose side effects, caching, rate limits, or whether it requires authentication, leaving gaps in behavioral understanding.

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 concise (4 lines), front-loaded with the main verb and resource, and each sentence adds meaningful detail about products and return items. No superfluous content.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately explains return types (levels, windows, setups) but omits details like output format, example values, and how it integrates with siblings. For a tool with 2 parameters and no required ones, it is moderately complete but could be more specific.

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%, so the description must document parameters. It mentions 'Products: ...' and 'for today' which loosely hint at product and date, but does not explain valid values, formats, or defaults with sufficient clarity. The default date null meaning 'today' is only implicit.

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 retrieves a full session planner with pattern-driven trade setups for today, listing specific products and return details (levels, windows, setups). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_forecast_today or get_regime.

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 lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention specific contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and sibling list.

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