apo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Fetch absolute price oscillator', which implies a read operation but doesn't cover critical aspects like data sources, rate limits, error handling, or output format. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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 complexity of 8 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain parameter meanings, behavioral traits, or return values, which are essential for a technical indicator tool with multiple inputs.

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 description provides no parameter information, and schema description coverage is 0%, leaving all 8 parameters undocumented. While the schema defines types and requirements, the description fails to explain what parameters like 'matype', 'datatype', or 'series_type' mean, making it hard to use correctly.

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 'Fetch absolute price oscillator' clearly states the action (fetch) and the resource (absolute price oscillator), which is a specific technical indicator. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'macd', 'rsi', or 'stoch' that also fetch technical indicators, leaving the distinction unclear.

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. With many sibling tools fetching technical indicators (e.g., 'macd', 'rsi', 'stoch'), the description lacks context about when the absolute price oscillator is appropriate, such as for trend analysis or momentum signals.

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