get_trading_schedules

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

Adds data source attribution ('из Т-Инвестиций') beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, but omits what the schedule includes (trading hours, holidays, sessions) and lacks return format details.

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?

Single sentence, six words, front-loaded with action verb. Efficient structure but undersized given tool complexity and absence of output schema documentation.

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?

Minimal viable coverage for a read-only endpoint. Critical gaps regarding response structure (what defines a trading schedule) and differentiation from related trading status tools, though schema compensates for input requirements.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with clear ISO 8601 documentation. Description adds no parameter semantics (default values, exchange code specifics), warranting baseline score.

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?

Clear verb ('получить'/get) and resource ('расписание торгов'/trading schedule from T-Investments), but fails to distinguish from sibling get_trading_status which returns current market state versus this tool's historical/future timetable 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?

No when-to-use guidance, prerequisites (required date range), or differentiation from similar market data tools like get_trading_status or get_candles.

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