get_narrative_pulse

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden. It successfully details the analytical constructs returned (sector rotation, momentum scores, cycle phase, narrative classification), but omits operational context like data latency, source aggregation, or permission requirements expected for a financial data tool.

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 efficient sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with specific action verbs (Identify/Shows) and immediately qualifies the scope (accelerating/decelerating/emerging). Every phrase earns its place by conveying distinct analytical dimensions.

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 zero input complexity and absence of output schema or annotations, the description adequately compensates by enumerating the key conceptual data points returned (sector rotation, momentum scores, cycle phase). Sufficient for agent selection despite lacking format specifics.

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?

Input schema contains zero parameters. By baseline rules for zero-parameter tools, no additional semantic explanation is required in the description, warranting the default score of 4.

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?

Uses specific verbs ('Identify', 'Shows') and clearly defines the resource as 'crypto narratives' with distinct scope (accelerating/decelerating/emerging). Differentiates from sibling tools like get_asset_momentum and get_sentiment_state by focusing on narrative/themes rather than individual assets or raw sentiment, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

Provides implied usage context with 'for positioning,' suggesting use during portfolio or trade positioning decisions. However, lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to related analysis tools like get_market_regime or get_asset_momentum.

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