bollinger_scan

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

No annotations present, so description carries full burden. It explains the tool scans an exchange, gives canonical name, and details parameters. However, it does not explicitly mention whether the tool is read-only or any rate limits, but given the context, it is adequately transparent.

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 well-structured with a main paragraph, example, and an args list. It is not overly verbose, though could be slightly more concise. However, it front-loads the key purpose.

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 that an output schema exists (context signal indicates has_output_schema: true), the description does not need to explain return values. It covers parameters, usage guidelines, and sibling differentiation comprehensively.

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%, but the description provides extensive parameter details: lists exchange values, timeframe options with typical squeeze thresholds, default for bbw_threshold, and limit max. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare 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 clearly states the tool scans for assets with low Bollinger Band Width (squeeze detection) and works with crypto and stocks. It distinguishes itself from 'coin_analysis' by specifying that this tool scans a whole exchange, not a single symbol.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (scan whole exchange for squeezes) and when not (for single symbol analysis, call coin_analysis). Provides an example with parameters and default values.

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