list_capabilities

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It describes the return content (manifest of endpoints, metrics, parameters, conventions) and purpose, but does not disclose potential behavioral aspects like authentication, rate limits, or whether the data is static or dynamic. For a read-only metadata endpoint, this is 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?

Two sentences, each earning its place: the first defines the return value, the second gives usage direction. No filler or redundant content.

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 (no params, output schema present), the description fully covers what it does and when to use it. The output schema presumably details the manifest structure, so the description doesn't need to list every field.

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, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific details (there are none), but it does clarify that the tool returns a manifest, which indirectly explains why no parameters are needed.

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 starts with 'Return the Trading Volatility v2 capability manifest' which clearly states the specific verb and resource. It also differentiates from sibling tools by positioning this as the self-orientation entry point, distinct from the other data-fetching 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?

Explicitly states 'Call this first to self-orient' and 'before making other calls', providing clear when-to-use guidance. This implies the alternative is any other tool, and the description makes the ordering clear.

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