price_trend_analysis

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds 'DEMO historical simulation' and 'Western parallel: CME seasonal charts', which clarify the tool analyzes historical data rather than real-time. However, it does not disclose limitations like latency or data freshness beyond the simulation context.

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 concise with three sentences, each adding unique information: purpose, Western parallel for context, and simulation note. It is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 presence of an output schema and three well-described parameters, the description could be more complete by summarizing the output format (e.g., trend direction, forecast values) or clarifying that 'DEMO historical simulation' means no real-time data. It covers the tool's role but leaves gaps.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds no additional semantics beyond confirming the tool's purpose. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already provides necessary details.

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 states 'Analyse price trends for a commodity to inform sell/hold timing', which clearly identifies the action (analyse trends) and resource (commodity prices). It distinguishes itself from siblings like commodity_price_query (current price) and sell_hold_decision (decision after analysis).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sell_hold_decision or regional_price_comparison. The description mentions 'inform sell/hold timing' but does not state prerequisites or exclusions.

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