get_market_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It adds context by saying 'delayed' and 'public', indicating data is not real-time and likely requires no authentication. However, it does not address error behavior, rate limits, or the exact metadata fields, though an output schema exists to fill some gaps.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action and contains no filler. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is adequate but not rich. It could clarify what 'metadata' includes and explicitly differentiate from get_market_price_history, though the tool name 'snapshot' helps. The output schema reduces the need to explain return values.

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 only one parameter 'ticker' with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description merely repeats 'ticker' without adding format examples, acceptable values, or any clarifying details. Since the description must compensate for low schema coverage, this is a clear gap.

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 uses a specific verb 'Return' and clearly identifies the resource as 'delayed public market-price metadata' for a 'ticker'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_market_price_history, which focuses on historical prices, by emphasizing a snapshot of metadata.

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 by stating it returns data for a ticker, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools, so the guidance is implied rather than direct.

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