crypto_get_macd

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'Get MACD'. It does not mention data source, return format, calculation behavior, or any side effects. This is essentially a tautology that adds no behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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 a single short sentence, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It lacks any structure to convey parameter context or usage nuance, making it insufficient for a tool with 10 parameters.

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 (10 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, many similar siblings), the one-line description is completely inadequate. It does not explain how MACD is calculated, what the response looks like, or how this tool relates to other crypto indicator tools.

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?

The schema has 10 parameters with 0% description coverage, yet the description does not explain any of them. The parameter names like 'short_window_size' and 'signal_window_size' are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage or clarify types, defaults, or relationships.

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 retrieves MACD data for a crypto pair, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like stocks_get_macd and forex_get_macd by specifying 'crypto'. However, it is minimal and does not elaborate on what constitutes a 'crypto pair' or the context of the MACD calculation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention sibling tools or any exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and sibling list.

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