forex_losers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation but does not state output format, sorting criteria, the number of results, or any limitations. The agent gains no insight into what 'top losers' actually returns.

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 sentence of five words, extremely concise and direct. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it easy to scan. While it lacks structured formatting, it is appropriately minimal for a parameterless convenience tool.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should clarify the return value (e.g., a list of forex pairs with percentage losses). It does not, making the tool a black box. An agent cannot predict what data will be returned or how to interpret it, which is inadequate for confident invocation.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is empty. Baseline of 4 is appropriate because there is no parametric information to explain, and the description does not incorrectly invent any.

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 uses a clear verb-resource structure ('Get top forex losers') and is distinguishable from sibling tools like 'forex_gainers' by the direction. However, it lacks specifics on what defines 'top' (e.g., by percentage change, volume) and the time window, leaving slight ambiguity.

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 'stocks_losers' or 'futures_losers'. The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess applicability without explicit direction.

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