cap_stream_alerts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It explains that alerts are triggered when price-level exceeds specified direction, but does not clarify if this is a streaming endpoint, how it terminates, or rate limits. Partial disclosure.

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 extremely concise (one sentence with an example). However, it is too brief for the complexity of the nested alerts parameter, sacrificing completeness for brevity.

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 complexity (3 parameters, nested objects, no schema coverage), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the behavior of duration_s and auto_close, nor does it leverage the output schema. The agent would struggle to use this 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 0%. The description only partially explains the 'alerts' parameter with an example, but fails to describe 'duration_s' and 'auto_close'. The example is incomplete and does not clarify the structure sufficiently.

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 monitors EPICs for price-level crossings, which is a specific verb and resource. It hints at differentiation from other stream tools (e.g., cap_stream_prices) by focusing on alerting, but could be more explicit.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like cap_stream_prices or cap_stream_candles. The description lacks context for agent decision-making.

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