nse_market_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the expected return values (OPEN, CLOSED, PRE_OPEN, POST_CLOSE), trading hours, and IST time, and explicitly states 'No arguments needed.' It does not mention update frequency or latency, but these are minor omissions.

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: purpose first, followed by output details, argument requirement, and a concrete example. Every sentence contributes value with no redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity, the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns (market status, trading hours, IST time), states that it takes no arguments, and provides an example. No additional context is needed.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema already reflects that (empty properties). The description adds 'No arguments needed,' which confirms but doesn't extend the schema. Per the baseline for 0 parameters, this is appropriate.

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 function with a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('Indian stock market (NSE/BSE)'). It also lists possible return statuses, making the purpose unmistakable and distinct from sibling quote/analysis tools.

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 (e.g., example 'Shows if market is open right now') but does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when not to use it. However, for a simple no-arg status check, the purpose itself is clear enough.

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