preview_backtest

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the tool does not start a backtest and operates in the 'local browser profile.' Yet it does not explain side effects, persistence, browser session state, or whether existing configuration is overwritten.

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 the primary action. Every clause adds context, and 'Use this first' is a useful directive. However, for a tool with this many parameters, the brevity edges toward underspecification.

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?

The tool has 10 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and sibling tools for execution and results. The description covers only the highest-level purpose and ordering; it lacks parameter guidance, side-effect detail, and a clear relationship to the other backtest tools.

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 input schema has 10 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description names none of them. Without any explanation of startDate, endDate, stopLoss, target, or the enum fields, an agent has no semantic guidance beyond the raw 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Configure AlgoTest Backtester in the local browser profile.' It also differentiates from the sibling run_backtest by explicitly stating it does so 'without starting a backtest,' and 'Use this first' establishes its role as a precursor in the workflow.

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?

'Use this first' gives an explicit when-to-use instruction and implies this precedes backtest execution. However, it does not name sibling alternatives like backtest_strategy or run_backtest, nor does it state when this tool should NOT be used.

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