get_market_overview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the specific metrics shown (VIX, put/call ratios, GEX regime), which adds context, but does not mention data sources, update frequency, or any limitations. Adequate but not rich.

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 concise and well-structured with a short intro, a bulleted usage list, and a returns line. However, the 'Returns' line largely repeats the title and could be omitted, slightly reducing efficiency.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should convey what the response looks like. It says 'Returns: Market-wide volatility and positioning overview' which is vague and tautological. It also doesn't explicitly differentiate from closely related siblings like get_vix_snapshot or get_gex, making the tool less complete in context.

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 schema coverage is 100% trivially. Baseline for zero-param tools is 4, and the description adds no parameter semantics, which is acceptable since there is nothing to explain.

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's purpose: 'Get market-wide volatility overview' and specifies the content: 'aggregate volatility metrics across major indices and sectors, including VIX levels, put/call ratios, and GEX regime.' This is a specific verb+resource and differentiates from more specialized siblings, though it does not explicitly name them.

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 includes an explicit 'Use this tool when the user asks about' list covering market overview, overall volatility, VIX sentiment, and broad positioning. This is clear guidance on when to use, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or named alternative tools, which would be needed for a 5.

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