signallord_get_macro_indicators

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, indicating a safe, read-only operation. The description adds value by detailing the output structure (e.g., each section includes a composite score on a 0-10 scale) without contradicting any 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 two sentences: the first states the purpose, the second lists the outputs. It is front-loaded, concise, and every sentence contributes essential information with no waste.

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 read-only nature, complete annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the key indicators and their composite scores. No critical information is missing for an AI agent to understand the output.

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?

The input schema has one parameter (response_format) with a default, but the description does not mention this parameter or its purpose. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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's purpose: 'Get macroeconomic indicators relevant to Bitcoin.' It lists specific indicators (DXY, VIX, Fear & Greed, etc.), differentiating it from sibling tools like signallord_get_btc_metrics or signallord_get_composite_score which focus on different aspects.

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 when macro context is needed but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. The user must infer from the listed indicators.

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