signal_macd_rsi

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

With no annotations, the description minimally discloses a required data length (max(slow+signal, rsiInterval)+1 data points), which is a key behavioral constraint. However, it does not describe the output format (e.g., buy/sell signals, numeric values) or side effects.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, front-loading the purpose. Every sentence is justified, providing essential info without verbosity.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description should explain the output (e.g., signal type) and parameter influence. It only mentions data requirement, leaving significant gaps for an agent to use 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?

All parameters are described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema; it only states a data requirement that relates to parameters but doesn't explain their roles.

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 is a combined signal using MACD and RSI, which distinguishes it from other signal tools like signal_bb_rsi or signal_ma_cross. The verb '组合信号' (combined signal) specifies the output type.

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 this tool versus alternatives like signal_bb_rsi or indicator_macd alone. The description only provides a data requirement without context for selecting this tool.

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