Get Active Trading Halts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds context: source (Nasdaq Trader feed), return fields, and the fact that an empty list is not an error. No contradictions. For a read-only tool with no params, this is fully transparent.

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?

Three sentences: scope, output details, and usage hints. No filler, front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Despite no parameters, the description covers all necessary behavioral context: source, fields, normal empty response, and a practical use case. With an output schema available, the description is complete.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description doesn't need to explain params; it adds value by describing the output fields and behavior, exceeding the baseline for high coverage.

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 it lists active trading halts across NASDAQ/NYSE/AMEX, specifies the feed source, and lists key fields. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_quote by framing halts as catalysts and suggesting a follow-up action.

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?

Explicitly describes the use case (discover halted names) and suggests get_quote as a next step. Clarifies that an empty list is normal. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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