india_vix

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool returns current VIX, signal classification (low/elevated/panic), 30-day statistics, full history, and an interpretation guide. It also explains the free NSE data source. It doesn't detail response format or data delays, but for a read-only market data tool this is substantial transparency.

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 well-structured with a clear title, rationale, bullet-point feature list, parameter explanation, and examples. It is slightly verbose (e.g., the Trendlyne note) but every section adds useful context and no information is wasted.

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 covers the purpose, parameter, and examples. It lacks explicit caveats about data availability or error scenarios, but the provided details are sufficient for most use cases and the output schema handles return structure.

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 schema has 0% parameter coverage, but the description fully compensates by defining 'days' as the lookback period with a default of 30 and providing usage examples for both default and custom values. This makes the parameter entirely unambiguous.

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 identifies the tool as the India VIX volatility index, listing its specific outputs: current level, daily change, signal zones, 30-day stats, full history, and interpretation guide. This distinguishes it from siblings like nifty_index or stock_quote by naming the exact instrument and core purpose.

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 fetching India VIX data but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like nifty_index or nse_historical. The note about Trendlyne vs NSE data source provides context but not direct comparison or exclusion criteria.

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