calculate_technical_indicator

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

Without annotations, the description discloses use of TA-Lib, customizable periods, lookback windows, and a return limit of 1000 data points. It lacks details on error handling and data source reliance, but is transparent about its core 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?

The description is informative but slightly verbose. It is well-structured with a clear hierarchy: purpose, list of indicators, use cases, customization, and examples. Could be more concise without losing meaning.

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's complexity and lack of output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return limit but fails to specify the return format (e.g., data points with dates and values). This gap reduces completeness.

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 parameter descriptions cover all parameters, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds value by explaining usage context, providing examples, and grouping parameters by indicator, enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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 calculates technical indicators using TA-Lib and lists specific indicators (SMA, EMA, RSI, MACD, BBANDS). It differentiates from sibling tools like get_price_history by specifying use cases for technical analysis.

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 explicit guidance on when to use the tool, such as for overbought/oversold conditions, trend identification, and momentum signals. It also hints at alternatives by listing sibling tools.

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