macropulse

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses payment requirement and endpoint costs, but does not mention rate limits, failure modes, or read-only nature. Behavioral traits beyond payments are absent.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement upfront, followed by a bullet list of endpoints. It is appropriately sized given the number of actions, though some redundancy exists in listing costs twice.

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 the tool's complexity (numerous endpoints, payment requirement, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context for a developer to understand what each action returns and how to use it. Missing return format details are partially offset by endpoint descriptions.

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% with parameter descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds value for the 'action' enum by listing endpoints with costs and brief outputs, but other parameter descriptions remain minimal and unchanged.

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 provides real-time macro intelligence for forex and CFD traders, listing endpoints with brief descriptions. While it distinguishes from unrelated tools, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar sibling 'pulse' tools beyond naming.

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 mentions a payment requirement via PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other pulse tools). No context on when not to use it or which endpoint to choose based on user need.

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