multi_timeframe_analysis

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only describes inputs and timeframes, lacking details on what the analysis entails (e.g., indicators, outputs), whether it's read-only, or any 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 concise and front-loaded with purpose. The args section is efficiently formatted without extraneous content. However, the example-heavy approach for parameters slightly reduces conciseness.

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 lack of output schema and behavioral info, the description is incomplete for a multi-timeframe analysis tool. It fails to differentiate from 27 sibling tools or explain what results to expect.

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 add meaning. It provides example values for symbol and exchange but does not explain constraints, formats beyond examples, or purpose of each parameter, offering only superficial guidance.

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 states 'Multi-timeframe alignment analysis (Weekly → Daily → 4H → 1H → 15m)', which conveys the tool's function but lacks an explicit verb. It does not distinguish from sibling tools like combined_analysis or multi_agent_analysis, making it somewhat vague.

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 siblings. The description implies it's for multi-timeframe analysis but gives no context about prerequisites, alternatives, or scenarios where other tools are preferred.

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