tradingview_market_indices

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Get real-time values' adds no new behavioral traits beyond confirming it is a read operation. The description adds context about the indices but not additional behavioral caveats.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no wasted words. It efficiently communicates what the tool does and its use case.

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 tool with no input and no output schema, the description specifies the indices returned and the real-time nature. It does not detail the response format, but it is sufficient for an agent to understand the data provided.

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 no input parameters; the schema is empty with 100% coverage. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it provides no parameter information, which 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 'Get real-time values for major market indices' and lists specific indices (VIX, S&P 500, NASDAQ Composite, Dow Jones). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like tradingview_quote (individual stocks) and tradingview_scan (screening).

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 notes it is 'Essential for gauging broad market conditions, risk sentiment, and options pricing context,' which guides when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, though the purpose is clear relative to siblings.

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