pgiq_markets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must handle behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation with no side effects. For a simple listing tool, this is adequate, though it could mention that no authentication or rate limits apply.

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 two sentences, completely front-loaded with the action and result. Every word serves a purpose, with a clear directive ('Start here') that guides usage. No wasted language.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and what it returns. It also provides a usage hint for discovering market IDs, which is essential for context with sibling tools. Complete for this simple listing tool.

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 input schema has no parameters, so schema description coverage is 100% trivially. However, the description adds meaning by explaining that the tool returns a list of markets with tier, score, and outlook, which is not captured in the empty schema. This adds value for an agent.

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 'List' and the resource 'every rated power market', specifying the returned attributes (PGIQ tier, 0-100 score, outlook). It also explicitly differentiates from siblings by noting this is the starting point to discover market IDs, which is a unique purpose.

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 explicitly says 'Start here to discover market ids', which implies this tool should be used first to obtain market IDs for other tools like pgiq_best or pgiq_rating. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, the context is clear and sufficient.

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