get_market_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It describes the return data categories but does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The read-only nature is implied but not stated explicitly, and the description lacks details on data freshness or system impact.

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 four sentences long, front-loads the main purpose, and provides essential details without extraneous information. Every sentence adds value, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 absence of parameters and presence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains the tool's purpose and output categories. However, it does not mention any prerequisites, such as authentication or data latency, which would enhance completeness for a system health overview 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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%. According to guidelines, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed.

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 retrieves a summary of all tokens with an operational overview. It lists specific outputs (system-wide stats, tokens grouped by status, etc.), which makes the purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_token_feeds or check_oracle_health, which could provide overlapping information.

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 mentions the tool is 'useful for quickly understanding what Pythia covers and whether the system is healthy,' which implies when to use it. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention alternatives among the 16 sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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