cci

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 commodity channel index' without explaining what this operation entails—such as data sources, rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or what 'fetch' implies (e.g., real-time vs. historical data). This leaves critical behavioral traits unspecified.

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 with a single phrase, 'Fetch commodity channel index,' which is front-loaded and wastes no words. While it may be under-specified, it scores high on conciseness as every word directly contributes to stating the purpose 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 the complexity (a financial technical indicator tool with 5 parameters), lack of annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to provide necessary context on behavior, parameters, or outputs, making it inadequate for effective tool invocation.

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 adds no meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. With 5 parameters (symbol, interval, month, time_period, datatype) and no explanation in the description of what they represent or how they affect the fetch operation, the agent lacks essential semantic context for proper usage.

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 commodity channel index' clearly states the action (fetch) and the resource (commodity channel index), which is a specific technical indicator. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its many siblings (like rsi, macd, etc.) that also fetch different technical indicators, leaving the purpose somewhat vague in context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools for technical indicators (e.g., rsi, macd, bbands), there's no mention of specific use cases, prerequisites, or comparisons, leaving the agent without contextual direction.

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