analyze_bb_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that only the latest value is returned and explains the two modes. It implies a safe read operation without destructive effects.

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 extremely concise, using bullet points for clarity. Every sentence adds value (purpose, mode explanation, alternative usage). No wasted words.

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 simplicity and the absence of an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it returns, modes, the limitation of latest value only, and a pointer for charting. It could mention the typical response structure but is sufficient.

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 adds meaning for the `mode` parameter by explaining default vs extended. Other parameters (`pair`, `type`, `limit`) are not described, though defaults and enums are 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 provides a numerical snapshot of Bollinger Bands values, with specific modes for basic or extended analysis. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being BB-specific and lightweight.

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 explicitly advises using `prepare_chart_data` for time-series chart drawing, indicating when not to use this tool. However, it does not contrast with other indicator snapshots like `analyze_sma_snapshot`.

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