wma

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'Fetch' without disclosing behavioral traits such as data sources, rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output looks like (e.g., time-series data). 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 a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 (6 parameters, 4 required), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't provide enough context for an AI agent to understand how to use the tool effectively or interpret results, making it inadequate for the tool's needs.

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 schema provides no parameter details. The description adds no meaning beyond the tool name, failing to explain what parameters like 'symbol', 'interval', or 'time_period' mean or how they affect the weighted moving average calculation. It doesn't compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 weighted moving average' states a verb ('Fetch') and resource ('weighted moving average'), but it's vague about what exactly is being fetched (e.g., financial data for a symbol) and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'sma' or 'ema' which are similar technical indicators. It's not tautological but lacks specificity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'sma' (simple moving average) or 'ema' (exponential moving average), which are listed as siblings. The description provides no context, exclusions, or prerequisites for usage.

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