run_backtest

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

Adds useful behavioral info beyond annotations: mentions 300-second timeout and progress reporting. No contradiction with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false are consistent with run action).

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 sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, prerequisite, performance details. No fluff.

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?

Covers key aspects: required prerequisites, runtime behavior, and hints at return (via output schema). Missing details about error states or what happens if cache is missing, but generally sufficient.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds some value (date format YYYY-MM-DD, lists required params) but does not fully explain each parameter's meaning or constraints.

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?

Clearly states it runs a backtest for a symbol with a registered strategy. However, does not distinguish from siblings like run_optimize or run_monte_carlo, which are different backtest variants.

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 a prerequisite (call fetch_data first) and mentions long-running behavior with timeout. But lacks guidance on when to use this vs. other backtest-related sibling tools.

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