get_indicator_values

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

Explicitly states the tool is read-only, a key behavioral trait. No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden; it does so well by clarifying the live nature of the data.

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 sentences, no wasted words. First sentence states the core function, second gives usage examples. Perfectly concise.

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 simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, filtering, read-only nature, and use cases. Does not mention error handling for invalid strategies, but that's acceptable for this simplicity.

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?

The schema has 50% description coverage; only 'name' has a description. The description adds context for 'name' ('filter to one indicator'), which matches the schema. The 'strategy' parameter is not elaborated, but the description doesn't need to repeat the schema; it adds some value.

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 returns live values of indicators in a strategy, with an optional name filter. It distinguishes from siblings like 'compute_indicator' and 'list_indicators'.

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 concrete examples like 'what's the EMA reading' and 'is the RSI overbought now', guiding the agent on when to use it. Doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the examples are sufficient.

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