analyze_indicators

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool is analytical (returns text with values/trends/signals) and implies read-only behavior. Could explicitly state it does not modify data, but overall adequate.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with purpose, includes key usage hint and cross-references to siblings. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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, description adequately describes return format (text with latest values, trend, signals). It covers usage context (limit recommendation) and distinguishes from many siblings. Slightly vague on exact output structure, but sufficient for an analysis tool.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description adds meaning by advising an appropriate limit value ('e.g., 日足200本') but does not explain pair or type in detail. Some compensation, but not full parameter documentation.

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 comprehensive analysis of technical indicators (RSI, MACD, SMA) and returns latest values, trend judgments, and signals as text. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like analyze_ema_snapshot by being a general multi-indicator tool.

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?

Explicitly suggests specifying a sufficient limit (e.g., 200 daily bars) and directs users to separate tools for drawing (prepare_chart_data/render_chart_svg) and backtesting (run_backtest), providing clear when-to-use guidance.

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