indicator_vwap

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It only states that calculation starts from the first K-line, but does not detail the return format, whether VWAP is cumulative per candle, or any edge cases (e.g., insufficient data).

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 at two sentences, front-loading the main concept. However, it omits information that could be included without bloating, such as return value hints.

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 tool has one input parameter and no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., VWAP values for each candle) and how it handles incomplete data. It does not, leaving the agent with incomplete understanding.

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 schema already describes the 'candles' parameter as an OHLCV array with 100% coverage. The description adds that VWAP is calculated from the first K-line, providing some behavioral context beyond the schema, but no further semantic detail.

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 computes VWAP (volume weighted average price), a specific indicator, and mentions it is calculated from the first K-line, which distinguishes it from other sibling indicators.

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 provides no guidance on when to use VWAP versus other indicators, such as moving averages or momentum oscillators. There is no mention of typical use cases or when not to use this tool.

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