ht_phasor

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions 'Fetch', implying a read operation, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, data sources, or output format. This is inadequate for a tool with parameters and no output schema.

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 but under-specified, which is a completeness issue rather than conciseness. For its brevity, it earns a high score in this dimension.

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 (technical financial/technical analysis tool), 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't explain the tool's function, usage, behavior, or parameters, making it inadequate for an AI agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It adds no meaning beyond the schema, failing to clarify what 'symbol', 'interval', 'month', or 'datatype' represent or how they affect the fetch. This leaves all 4 parameters undocumented.

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 hilbert transform - phasor components' states a verb ('Fetch') and resource ('hilbert transform - phasor components'), but it's vague and technical without explaining what the tool actually does or what 'phasor components' are. It doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'ht_dcperiod' or 'ht_sine', which appear related. The purpose is unclear to non-experts.

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 (e.g., 'ht_dcperiod', 'ht_sine'), the description offers no context, exclusions, or comparisons. This leaves the agent guessing about appropriate use cases.

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