简单移动平均

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

The annotations already mark the tool as read-only, so the description's main job is to explain how it behaves beyond safety. It does this by disclosing that the tool itself pulls K-line data before computing the SMA, and returns a stable SMA series. This is meaningful behavioral context, though it could say more about caching or how missing data is handled.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly explains the calculation pipeline and output. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary qualification; every clause contributes useful information.

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 simple indicator tool with read-only annotations and an output schema already present, the description is mostly complete. The main gap is the missing explanation of the 'limit' parameter and how the pull length influences the returned SMA series, which is important for a correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meanings. It only clarifies that 'period' is the cycle length; it does not explain what 'limit' means, how 'interval' relates to the K-line fetch, or what constraints affect the output series. The parameter semantics are far from fully covered.

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 the tool's action and resource: pulling K-lines and calculating a simple moving average. It also mentions the return value ('稳定 SMA 序列') and the meaning of period. This sharply distinguishes indicator_sma from siblings like indicator_ema, indicator_rsi, or indicator_macd.

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 implies usage: when a simple moving average over K-lines is needed, this tool should be used. However, it provides no explicit when/when-not guidance or alternatives, and the term '直连版' hints at a particular mode without fully explaining it.

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