signallord_get_mtf_trend

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. The description adds value by detailing the score range (-3 to +3) and the historical significance of alignment, which is beyond the 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?

Two sentences: the first states the purpose, the second explains the output. No fluff, front-loaded with key 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?

The description explains the output range and significance, and an output schema exists. However, it lacks details on computation or edge cases, but given the tool simplicity, it is 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?

Schema coverage is 50% (only 'days' has description). The tool description does not mention either parameter, failing to compensate for the undocumented 'response_format' parameter. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond schema.

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 explicitly states it returns a multi-timeframe trend alignment composite score from -3 to +3. The name 'get_mtf_trend' and the description distinguish it from siblings that are specific indicators (e.g., BTC metrics, capsize score). The verb 'get' and resource 'mtf_trend' are clear.

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 identifying high-conviction moves via extreme scores, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over sibling tools like 'signallord_get_composite_score' or 'signallord_get_regime'. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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