get_action_signals

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions paid tier and statistical methodology, but doesn't disclose side effects, rate limits, or what happens with no signals. Partial transparency.

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 concise sentences that front-load the main purpose, then detail, then condition (paid tier). No wasted words.

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?

No output schema, so description must explain returns. It mentions statuses and methodology but not exact output structure. Adequate but not complete for a statistical tool.

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 0 parameters (100% coverage), so baseline is 4. Description adds no param info, which is appropriate since none exist.

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 it retrieves statistically validated leading indicator signals for GDI and SMI, specifying Granger-causal relationships with p≤0.01, lag time, and directional accuracy, and returns statuses (ACTIVE, WATCH, CLEAR). This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes from siblings like get_predictive_signals.

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 use when needing leading indicator signals for GDI and SMI, and mentions it's paid tier only. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but the specificity provides clear context.

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