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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It reveals that the tool is free, optional, a subscription funnel, phase-driven, and can be exited via interest:false. It does not detail per-phase side effects or return behavior, but for a conversational pitch tool this is reasonable.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The most important decision-relevant information—optionality and alternatives—is front-loaded, followed by the phase flow and exit condition.

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 output schema and no annotations, the description adequately conveys purpose, alternatives, phase flow, and exit behavior. It could say more about what each phase produces or returns, but the combination of description and schema is sufficient for an agent to call it correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is only 33%, so the tool description must compensate for phase and interest. It adds meaning by ordering the phases into a funnel and defining interest:false as a bow-out. The symbol parameter is already well documented in the schema, so the overall parameter semantics are strong.

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 an optional intro and subscription funnel for the FX signal agent, and names the exact phase sequence. It also differentiates from siblings by explicitly saying the agent may skip it and call evaluate_symbol / scan_bottoms / scan_tops directly.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: it is FREE and OPTIONAL, and the agent may instead call the sibling tools directly. It also provides the exit condition with interest:false, making the decision boundary clear.

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