smart_volume_scanner

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool uses volume ratio, price change, and RSI ranges as filter criteria, but it does not describe the output format, whether it's read-only, or any side effects or limitations. The behavior of combining volume and technical analysis is only hinted at, not detailed.

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 a clear purpose, followed by a structured parameter list. Each line is useful and the format is easy to scan. The parameter explanations are somewhat redundant with the schema's defaults but still add semantic value.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is thin on context. It lacks insight into how the combination works, what 'smart' entails, when to choose this over other scanners, and what the actual output looks like (though the output schema may cover return format). The tool's sophistication warrants more explanation than a simple parameter list.

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 has zero description coverage, and the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter's meaning, default values, and for rsi_range, the possible values with their thresholds. This adds significant value beyond the schema fields, which are just names and types.

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 is a 'Smart volume + technical analysis combination scanner', specifying its function as a scanner combining volume metrics with technical indicators. This is more specific than simply 'scanner', but it doesn't explicitly differentiate it from sibling scanners like volume_breakout_scanner, so it falls short of a 5.

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 this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. It only lists parameters, leaving the user to infer when it might be appropriate; this is essentially no usage guidance.

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