market-regime-intel

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It explains the 5 signals and outputs but does not mention data freshness, potential side effects, or safety (e.g., read-only). Adequate but lacks deeper behavioral context.

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?

Two sentences: first covers purpose and signals, second lists outputs. Front-loaded with key information, no wasted words.

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?

No output schema, so the description fully accounts for return values (regime label, per-signal scores, composite confidence, narrative). Also explains the 5 input signals. Complete for a no-parameter tool.

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 zero parameters, so the description needs only to clarify that no direct inputs are required. It does this by specifying the data sources it uses internally. Baseline applies.

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?

Description clearly states it classifies US equity market regime using 5 specific signals and returns detailed outputs (regime label, per-signal scores, confidence, narrative). This distinguishes it from sibling market tools like market-movers or market-sentiment.

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 market regime classification but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor conditions or exclusions. Sibling tools are numerous but no differentiation advice is given.

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