Screener Indicators

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds context about the response structure: 'Technical indicators include a tech_values field showing available options'. This explains behavior beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences: first clearly states the purpose, second elaborates on a key detail (tech_values structure). No unnecessary words, front-loaded.

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 that output schema exists (stated), the description covers the essential aspects: keys, units, default ranges, and tech_values. Slightly lacking in explaining how defaults are defined or if there are limits, but overall sufficient.

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 coverage is 100% with a described optional 'symbol' parameter. The description does not mention the parameter, so it adds no value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 returns 'all available screener indicator keys with units and default value ranges', distinguishing it from sibling tools like screener_search or screener_strategy. The verb 'get' and resource 'indicator keys' are specific.

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 implies usage when a user needs available screener indicators, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., screener_strategy). No exclusion criteria or comparisons are provided.

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