plus_dm

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 states 'Fetch plus directional movement', which implies a read-only operation but does not specify whether it's a real-time or historical fetch, any rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or output format. This is inadequate for a tool with multiple 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 extremely concise with a single phrase, 'Fetch plus directional movement', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of clarity and completeness, but as per the dimension's focus on brevity and structure, it scores highly.

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 (5 parameters, 3 required, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage), the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the tool's purpose in context, parameter usage, behavioral aspects, or what to expect in return. This makes it inadequate for effective tool invocation by 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%, meaning none of the 5 parameters (symbol, interval, month, time_period, datatype) are documented in the schema. The description adds no information about what these parameters mean, their expected formats, or how they affect the fetch operation. This leaves all parameters semantically undefined.

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 plus directional movement' is tautological—it essentially restates the tool name 'plus_dm' with the verb 'Fetch'. It lacks specificity about what 'plus directional movement' refers to (e.g., a technical indicator for financial markets) and does not distinguish it from sibling tools like 'minus_dm' or 'plus_di', which appear related. This provides minimal clarity beyond the name itself.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling tools (e.g., 'minus_dm' or 'plus_di'), leaving the agent with no information to make an informed choice among similar financial/technical analysis tools in the server.

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