get_snapshots

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 mentions 'real-time' market snapshots, which hints at live data, but doesn't cover critical aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, data freshness, or error handling. This is inadequate for a tool that likely interacts with market data.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly without unnecessary elaboration.

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 complexity of market data tools and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a 'snapshot' includes (e.g., prices, volumes), how results are structured, or any behavioral traits, leaving significant gaps for the agent to operate effectively.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the 'contracts' parameter well-documented as a list of contract codes. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond this, such as explaining contract code formats or examples, but the schema provides sufficient baseline 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 verb ('Get') and resource ('real-time market snapshots'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from siblings like 'get_kbars' (which likely provides historical data) or 'search_contracts' (which might find contracts rather than their snapshots), missing full sibling differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_kbars' (possibly for historical data) and 'search_contracts' (for finding contracts), there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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