indicator_roc

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the name and a data requirement, but does not explain the computation formula, output format, edge cases, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand how the tool behaves.

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 sentence, very concise and front-loaded. It conveys the essential purpose and a key requirement without wasted words.

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?

For a technical indicator tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It fails to explain what ROC calculates, how to interpret the result, or any assumptions. An agent would lack sufficient context to use it correctly.

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?

The input schema already describes both parameters (values as price array, interval as calculation period) with 100% coverage. The description adds the useful constraint that values must contain at least interval data points, which is not enforced by the schema's minItems of 1.

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 clearly states it's the Rate of Change (ROC) indicator, which is a specific technical analysis tool. However, it does not differentiate from sibling indicator tools like indicator_mom or indicator_rsi.

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 mentions '需要至少 interval 个数据点' (requires at least interval data points), which implies a data length requirement. No explicit guidance on when to use ROC vs other indicators or when not to use it.

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