get_adxr

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

The description lacks behavioral details beyond 'smoothed ADX', but the tool is a read-only data retrieval with an output schema, reducing the need for extensive transparency. No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden, but the one-line definition is insufficient for safety or rate limit context.

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 extremely concise (one sentence) but lacks essential details. While it is front-loaded with the full indicator name, the brevity undermines clarity and completeness, making it minimally acceptable.

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 (4 parameters, no parameter descriptions, and many similar siblings), the description is incomplete. It fails to provide parameter context, usage guidance, or differentiation, leaving the agent underinformed despite the presence of an output schema.

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%, and the description does not explain any parameter (limit, period, symbol, interval) in the context of ADXR. The parameter names provide minimal hints, but the description adds no semantic value, making it hard to invoke correctly.

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 the tool returns the Average Directional Movement Index Rating, a smoothed version of ADX. It clearly identifies the resource and action (get) but does not explicitly distinguish it from similar siblings like get_adx or get_dx, relying on the name 'adxr' for differentiation.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_adx or other indicators. There are no context clues, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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