indicator_dx

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

The description adds one behavioral constraint: the minimum number of data points needed (2×interval+1). With no annotations, this is a helpful disclosure. However, it does not mention any other traits like output format, return behavior, or potential errors.

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 very concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides a key constraint. No filler content.

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 lack of an output schema and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., a single number, an object), or how to interpret the DX value. This is a significant gap for a financial indicator tool.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by relating the interval to the data requirement, but does not explain the smoothingType parameter or the structure of candles beyond what the schema already provides.

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 indicator (方向性运动指标/DX), which clearly identifies the tool's purpose. However, it does not explicitly state that it computes or returns the DX value, but the name alone is sufficient for differentiation from sibling indicators like ADX or BBands.

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 this tool versus other indicators. The only additional information is a data requirement, but there are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, nor alternatives mentioned.

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