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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only fetch via 'Get' and discloses the supported symbol universe, but says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, data freshness, or how the momentum score is scaled or interpreted.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and the argument list is tight with no filler. The docstring-style 'Args:' formatting is slightly heavier than needed for two parameters but does not obscure the 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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, and both parameters are fully enumerated. The only real gap is the absence of any explanation of what the momentum score represents or when to prefer it, which matters less for a simple read-only lookup.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description compensates well by enumerating every valid symbol value and every valid timeframe value, plus the 1h default. It still doesn't explain what a timeframe selection means semantically or what units the score is expressed in, but the enumerated domains are the critical missing piece from the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: "Get WickedAPI's momentum score for a symbol," which is unambiguous about what the tool returns. However, it never distinguishes itself from close siblings like wickedapi_price or wickedapi_funding_oi, so the agent must infer the boundary from the name alone.

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 lists valid inputs but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of when an agent should pick momentum over the sibling price or funding/OI tools. Usage is only implied by the verb 'Get.'

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