get_bollinger_bands

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It adds value by explaining the return interpretation (%B), but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any side effects, data freshness, or rate limits. Partial disclosure.

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 front-loaded with purpose and a helpful interpretation guide. It is structured with Args and Returns sections, but the interpretation explanation could be slightly more concise. Still, it earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return value details are not required in the description. The description covers purpose, parameter usage, and interpretation, which is sufficient for a technical indicator tool with 7 parameters. Missing usage guidelines slightly reduce completeness.

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 0% coverage (no descriptions on properties), but the description provides detailed explanations for all 7 parameters, including examples, defaults, and formats (e.g., ISO time, interval units). This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 it retrieves Bollinger Bands for a cryptocurrency, explains the indicator's purpose (volatility and reversal points), and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_sma and get_ema by focusing on the specific indicator.

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?

Usage is implied through the description of Bollinger Bands and %B interpretation, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, when not to use it, or any prerequisites.

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