get_coverage_index

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, rate limits, or authentication requirements. 'Pro tier' hints at access restrictions but is insufficient. The lack of any behavioral information is a significant gap.

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 very short, but it sacrifices clarity for brevity. It is not front-loaded effectively; the key purpose is stated but in a cryptic manner. Every sentence earns its place, but the overall meaning is not immediately clear.

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, the description should explain the return structure or data type. It only says 'High = accumulation signal before price', leaving the user to guess the format, range, or whether it's a single number or object. This is insufficient for a tool with two parameters.

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 100% for both parameters. The description does not add any additional semantics beyond the schema's 'Entity slug.' and 'Rolling window.'. While adequate, it could provide more context like examples or data formats.

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 states it is a 'BCA Coverage Index' composed of 'mention velocity x source diversity x editorial weight', clearly indicating it's a metric. It also hints at usage with 'High = accumulation signal before price'. However, it doesn't explicitly state that the tool returns the index value for a given entity and window, leaving some 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?

The description mentions 'Pro tier' suggesting a user tier, and the phrase 'High = accumulation signal before price' implies it's used for detecting accumulation. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it compare to siblings like get_history_coverage.

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