indicator_wma

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions the data length constraint. It does not disclose what happens if the constraint is violated, the formula used, or any side effects. The agent is left guessing about the tool's behavior.

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?

Extremely concise: a single sentence that states the purpose and a key constraint. No wasted words, front-loaded with the abbreviation. Every element earns its place.

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 2-parameter calculator, the description is adequate but minimal. It lacks details on output format (e.g., single value or array), typical use cases, or comparison to other indicators. An agent may need more 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?

Both parameters are described in the schema ('价格数组' and '计算周期'), and the description adds a meaningful constraint: '需要至少 interval 个数据点'. This clarifies a requirement beyond the schema's minimum of 1 for values.

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 computes a Weighted Moving Average (WMA) and specifies a data requirement. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like SMA or EMA, leaving ambiguity for selection.

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 on when to use WMA versus other indicators (e.g., EMA, SMA). The only usage hint is the requirement for at least 'interval' data points, which is a constraint rather than usage guidance.

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