smart_volume_scanner

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral details: returns list[dict] on success, and on failure returns a structured error envelope with code and retryable flag. It also specifies max limit of 30. This adds value beyond annotations.

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, starting with the purpose in one sentence, followed by a clear args list and return type. Every sentence is informative, though the args could be more structured (e.g., bullet points).

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 presence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context: parameters are fully documented, return type and error envelope are described. It lacks explanation of error codes or retryable semantics, but overall is adequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains all 5 parameters, including defaults, ranges (e.g., rsi_range values with numeric bounds), and purpose. This compensates entirely for the lack of schema-level descriptions.

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 it is a 'Smart volume + technical analysis combination scanner,' using a specific verb (scanner) and resources (volume and technical analysis). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like volume_breakout_scanner (purely volume) and bollinger_scan (purely technical).

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 implies usage for combining volume and technical analysis but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. It lacks guidance on context or prerequisites.

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