Get full indicator output

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description correctly aligns with that. It adds significant behavioral context: large payload size (100-300 KB), a refusal condition (results over 1 MB are refused with RESULT_TOO_LARGE), and the need for per-bar context. No contradiction; the description complements the annotations well.

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 concise and front-loaded: it opens with the core purpose and immediately notes the large payload and sibling alternative. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff or repeated schema information.

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 read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what the agent needs to know: what it returns, when to use it, size concerns, failure mode, and how to extend the time range. It's complete for a complex tool with 6 parameters and nested objects.

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 only 17%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'from' parameter (unix seconds for history) and implies the 'indicator' parameter through 'calculator output'. It doesn't detail 'config' or 'provider' but covers the key ones for usage. This is a strong compensation given the low coverage.

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's purpose: 'FULL calculator output — every per-bar plot array AND the metadata envelope' is specific and distinguishes it from the sibling get_indicator_signal. It also clearly identifies the verb (get) and resource (full indicator output), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 says 'Use only when the agent needs per-bar context; otherwise prefer get_indicator_signal', which routes the agent to the correct sibling. Also provides guidance on the optional 'from' parameter for loading history beyond the default window.

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