record_data

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains internal mechanism (shells out to CLI/script), notes data_type trade-offs, and mentions max_records. Lacks detail on overwrite behavior or side effects, but adequate.

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?

Efficient single paragraph: starts with purpose, then internals, then usage examples, then result. No redundant sentences, every part earns its place.

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 9 parameters, no output schema, description covers modes, defaults, and output format. Could mention return value or confirmation, but overall sufficient for agent to understand tool behavior.

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 100%, baseline 3. Description adds meaningful context beyond schema: explains mode behavior (live vs historical), data_type fidelity, and duration options. Helps agent select parameters appropriately.

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 captures market data into a .floxlog tape, with specific examples like 'record some BTC data' or 'pull a month of klines'. It differentiates from siblings (e.g., run_backtest) by focusing on data recording.

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 explicit when-to-use examples and mentions the result is drivable by BacktestRunner. However, does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives among siblings, which would strengthen guidance.

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