crypto_get_rsi

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the basic action. It does not mention how RSI is calculated, whether it returns a series or single value, default window size, or any limitations, leaving the agent without insight into the tool's behavior.

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?

At one sentence, the description is highly concise with no filler. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices necessary context, though for conciseness this is still favorably simple and front-loaded.

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 (8 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), a single sentence is grossly insufficient. There is no mention of response format, usage examples, or interpretation of RSI, making the description incomplete for an agent to use it correctly.

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 input schema has 8 parameters with zero description coverage, and the tool description names only the implicit 'crypto pair' (symbol). It does not explain limit, order, adjusted, timespan, timestamp, series_type, or window_size, so the agent cannot infer their meanings or defaults.

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 the Relative Strength Index for a crypto pair. It distinguishes from sibling tools like stocks_get_rsi and forex_get_rsi by specifying 'crypto pair', and from other crypto indicators such as crypto_get_ema or crypto_get_sma.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to prefer RSI over MACD or SMA, or when to choose crypto over other asset classes. The description is a bare statement of functionality without context.

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