signallord_get_cycle_bottom_probability

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

Annotations already indicate safe read-only, non-destructive, idempotent. Description adds context on signal composition and output fields (current.signals, delta_30d), but does not disclose full behavior beyond that.

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 plus bullet-like output description. No fluff, front-loaded with purpose. Efficient and well-structured.

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 output schema likely covers return values, description sufficiently explains the score nature and sub-signals. Minor gap on parameter usage.

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 description coverage is only 50% (days described, response_format not). Description does not mention parameters at all, failing to compensate for the gap.

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?

Clearly states it calculates a cycle bottom probability by aggregating multiple bottoming signals. Name and description together distinguish it from siblings like get_cycle_top_probability, but lacks explicit differentiation.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites or exclusions. Relies on name and vague context.

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