pane_set_symbol

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does so reasonably: it labels the operation STATE_MUTATING, says the target pane's symbol changes, and clarifies that active focus is not changed. It does not describe error behavior or return values, but those gaps are minor for this simple setter.

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 compact and front-loaded, with clear labeled sections for usage, side effects, and limitations. Every sentence adds a distinct piece of information without redundancy.

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?

For a two-parameter pane symbol setter with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, when to use, mutation side effect, and the main limitation. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented with types and descriptions. The description adds only a multi-pane example and the limitation that the index must exist, which is useful but does not substantially extend parameter semantics beyond the 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?

States a specific verb and resource: sets a financial ticker symbol on a specific pane index. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like chart_set_symbol by emphasizing 'directly on a specific pane index without changing active focus.'

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?

Provides an explicit WHEN TO USE section with a concrete multi-pane example (BTCUSD on pane 0, ETHUSD on pane 1). It does not name an alternative tool for when this should not be used, but the focus-scope distinction gives clear context.

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