get_market_context

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It reveals defaults for expiry and asset_type and the api_key environment fallback, but does not address potential side effects, rate limits, error handling, or explicitly confirm read-only behavior beyond the word 'Fetch'.

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 and well-structured: a one-sentence summary followed by a compact Args list. It is front-loaded with the tool's purpose and contains no redundant text.

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 the output schema exists, return values are already specified. The description covers all inputs: symbol, expiry, asset_type, and api_key, with defaults and one required param. It provides enough context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The schema has no descriptions, but the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: symbol as ticker, expiry with allowed values and default, asset_type with allowed values and default, and api_key optional with environment fallback. This substantially exceeds schema information.

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 fetches live quote details, LTP, volume, and context for Stocks, Indices, and Futures, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_option_chain and get_historical_data.

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 implies the tool is for live market context but does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives like get_batch_market_context or get_historical_data. It provides no exclusions or comparisons, so the agent must infer usage from the tool's scope and sibling names.

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