get_rsi_alert

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. The phrase 'Returns details' implies a read-only operation, which is sufficient. However, it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The description is minimal but not contradictory.

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 concise sentence of 9 words, front-loading the purpose efficiently. No extraneous information is present.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should provide information about the return value. It simply says 'details' without specifying what fields or structure to expect. This is adequate for a simple retrieval but lacks completeness for an agent to anticipate the response format.

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 100% for the sole parameter 'uuid,' which is described as 'UUID of the RSI alert.' The description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses 'Returns details of a specific RSI (MOEX) market order,' clearly indicating a read operation on a single resource. The verb 'Returns' and the resource 'specific RSI market order' distinguish it from sibling tools like list_rsi_alerts (list multiple) and create/update/delete (mutations).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the context of 'specific' implies it should be used when a UUID is available, contrasting with list_rsi_alerts. No explicit 'when-not' or prerequisites are provided.

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