analyze_ichimoku_snapshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explains that the tool returns a numerical snapshot of Ichimoku metrics and is limited to the latest data point. While it does not mention auth or rate limits, the tool is read-only and non-destructive, and the description is accurate and truthful.

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: two sentences plus an alert about latest value only. Every word adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with the tool's purpose.

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 no output schema, the description should provide more detail about the return format (e.g., field names, data types). While it lists the concepts covered (price-cloud relation, cross, slope), an agent cannot reliably parse the output without additional structure info. The complexity is moderate, but completeness is only adequate.

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, meaning the parameter names/types provide minimal context. The description fails to explain the meaning or effect of any parameter (e.g., pair, type, limit, lookback), leaving agents to guess. This is a critical gap for a tool with 4 parameters.

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 returns a numerical snapshot of Ichimoku Cloud indicators (price-cloud relation, tenkan-kijun cross, cloud slope) and specifies it is 'latest value only.' This sets it apart from sibling tools like analyze_sma_snapshot or prepare_chart_data, which serve different purposes.

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 notes that it provides only the latest value, and directs users to prepare_chart_data with ICHIMOKU for time-series charting. This gives clear guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives.

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