edgex_get_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action (get summary) without mentioning whether data is real-time, the return format, or any other behavioral characteristics. For a read operation, this is a notable gap.

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, concise sentence that conveys the core purpose without fluff. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 empty input schema and no output schema, the description is the sole source of information. 'Volume and trading summary' is somewhat vague—it could include price, changes, or other metrics—but it is minimally adequate for a zero-parameter summary 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, which sets a baseline of 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and there are none to clarify.

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 'Get market-wide volume and trading summary' clearly states the verb (Get) and resource (market-wide volume and trading summary). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_ticker or get_depth by emphasizing the market-wide scope, though it lacks detail on what 'summary' includes.

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 implies usage for obtaining an aggregate market overview, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_ticker or get_kline. There are no exclusions or named alternatives.

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