get_station_market

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does add useful context — this reads a local Market.json snapshot and is scoped to the current station — which implies a read-only, location-bound call, but it never says what happens when not docked, how fresh Market.json is, or that results may error when the file is absent.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource and data source up front and no filler. The parenthetical fragment style is terse but readable; nothing is wasted, though the terseness leaves gaps noted elsewhere.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and there is only one parameter. Still, for a location-dependent tool it omits the precondition (must be docked), the failure mode when no market data exists, and any note on data staleness — gaps an agent would need to call it confidently.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description never mentions journal_dir. The parameter is optional with a null default and a fairly self-explanatory name, which limits the damage, but nothing explains that it overrides the journal file location or what the default resolution is.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: retrieves the live market (prices/supply/demand) at the commander's docked station, with the data source named (Market.json). The 'docked station' scope implicitly separates it from cross-station siblings like find_commodity, find_multi_supply, and spansh_search_stations, though none are named.

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?

'At your docked station' implies the condition for use (you are docked and want local prices), but there are no explicit when-to-use/when-not statements and no named alternatives such as find_commodity for commodity-wide lookups. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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