smart_volume_scanner

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses return type (list[dict]) and error envelope on total failure, and mentions inheritance from inner call. However, it does not state whether the tool is read-only or destructive, nor any rate limits or auth requirements.

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 structured as a docstring with clear Args and Returns sections, making it easy to parse. The first sentence is concise, but the full docstring is somewhat verbose. It could be more compact without losing clarity.

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 5 optional parameters and an output schema (not shown), the description covers parameters and the return value structure, including error cases. It does not explain the contents of the returned list[dict] (likely covered by output schema), but missing usage context relative to sibling scanners.

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%, so the description must compensate. It provides clear explanations for all 5 parameters, including types, defaults, and allowed values (e.g., rsi_range options 'oversold', 'overbought', 'neutral', 'any'). It also adds constraints like limit max 30, which is not in 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?

The description clearly states it's a combination scanner of volume and technical analysis (RSI). It specifies the verb 'scanner' and the resource, but doesn't explicitly use a verb like 'scan' and doesn't differentiate from siblings such as volume_breakout_scanner or bollinger_scan.

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. Siblings like volume_breakout_scanner likely serve a similar purpose without RSI filtering, but the description does not help the agent choose.

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