get_market_context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that live freshness triggers an ingest step and requires API keys, which is useful. However, it does not mention rate limits, error behavior, or whether the tool is read-only. The description adds enough context to justify a 3.

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 very concise: two sentences. The first sentence clearly states the tool's purpose, and the second covers parameter usage. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 that an output schema exists to detail return values, the description is fairly complete. It explains key parameters and their modes. The only gap is the unexplained 'scope' parameter, but its default value mitigates the issue.

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 compensate. It explains the 'assets' parameter (optional, default BTC, ETH) and 'freshness' parameter (cached vs live with API key requirement). However, the 'scope' parameter (default 'daily') is not explained. Two of three parameters are described, which is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 provides a fused market backdrop including sentiment, macro events, FRED indicators, ETF flows, and market breadth. It distinguishes from sibling tools (allocation, portfolio state, rebalance plan) by focusing on market context.

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 gives specific usage guidance for the freshness parameter: 'freshness=cached uses the local ingest DB; freshness=live runs ingest first (requires ingest API keys on the host).' It implies when to use each mode but does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or compare to siblings.

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