signallord_get_etf_flow_history

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. Description adds data source (CoinGlass), start date (January 2024), and pre-computed cumulative sums. However, it does not disclose update frequency, rate limits, or behavior when data is unavailable, which are relevant for a historical data tool.

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?

Three sentences with optimal front-loading: first sentence states primary purpose, subsequent sentences add specifics on aggregation, cumulative windows, and source. No redundant information.

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?

Tool is relatively simple with one optional param and an output schema. Description provides data source, temporal granularity, and cumulative window definitions. Missing parameter description but compensated somewhat by the output schema and annotations. Nearly complete.

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?

Input schema has one optional parameter (response_format) with a default. Schema description coverage is 0% because the description does not mention this parameter or its possible values. Since description fails to add meaning beyond the schema, even though there is only one simple parameter, this is a 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?

Description clearly states 'Get Bitcoin ETF flow history' and elaborates on data sources, temporal resolutions (daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, yearly), and cumulative windows (7d, 30d, 90d, 365d). This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from sibling tools which cover different BTC metrics.

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 this tool vs. alternatives. The description implies usage context by detailing the data provided, but lacks exclusions or references to sibling tools. The agent must infer from the tool name and description alone.

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