unlock_market_impact

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Analyze', which implies a read-only operation, but does not disclose what the analysis returns, whether it requires external data, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for an unannotated tool.

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 a single, clear sentence with no fluff or redundant information. It is appropriately sized for its simple one-parameter schema, and every word earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain what the analysis produces (e.g., a score, a report, a list of factors). It also does not clarify how it differs from similar unlock tools, leaving the agent uncertain about expected results and potential alternatives.

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 one parameter (projectId) with a description 'Project ID to analyze', giving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond this, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already handles parameter semantics adequately.

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's action ('Analyze') and resource ('potential market impact of upcoming unlocks') for a given project. It distinguishes itself from siblings like unlock_get_upcoming and unlock_vesting_analytics by focusing on 'market impact' rather than listing or vesting analytics, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus other unlock-related tools. The description only says 'for a project', which is a parameter context, not a usage guideline. There is no mention of prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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