forex_get_sma

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only mentions the symbol format. It does not describe return format, pagination, time range handling, or any edge cases. The read-only nature is implied by 'Get' but not stated explicitly, and no other behavioral traits are disclosed.

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 efficiently concise, consisting of two short sentences that immediately convey the core purpose and the critical symbol format. Every word earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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?

For a tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It provides almost no context about how the SMA is calculated, what the parameters control, or what the response looks like, making it inadequate for correct invocation without external knowledge.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does provide the symbol format ('C:EURUSD'), which is useful, but it fails to explain the remaining 7 parameters (e.g., window_size, timespan, series_type) that exist in the schema, leaving the agent without crucial guidance on how to configure the SMA calculation.

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's function: 'Get Simple Moving Average for a forex pair.' It specifies the resource (SMA), the market type (forex), and the symbol format ('C:EURUSD'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like forex_get_rsi or stocks_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?

The description implies usage for obtaining SMA values in forex markets but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. There are no exclusions or alternative recommendations, leaving the agent to infer based on the tool name and reference to forex pairs.

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