indicator_dema

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits, but it only mentions a data requirement. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, or requires authentication, leaving significant gaps for a computation tool.

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 consists of two concise sentences with no redundant words. It front-loads the indicator name and follows with a critical constraint.

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 low complexity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It fails to explain the purpose or interpretation of DEMA, which would help an AI agent understand when to use it.

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 short descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by explicitly requiring 'at least interval data points,' which is not enforced by the schema alone. This constraint helps ensure valid usage.

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 names the tool 'Double Exponential Moving Average (DEMA)' and states the data requirement, clearly indicating a financial indicator computation. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying DEMA, which is unique among the many indicator tools.

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 DEMA versus alternative indicators like EMA or SMA. The only usage hint is the data point requirement, which is procedural rather than contextual.

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