get_roc

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states basic definition; does not disclose whether it returns a single value or time series, any side effects (none expected), or important behavioral constraints like data requirements.

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?

Single sentence, very concise. No wasted words, but lacks structure that could improve readability for multiple aspects.

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?

With 4 parameters and no param descriptions, the tool is insufficiently documented. Despite output schema existing, the description doesn't orient the AI on what the ROC output represents (e.g., values above zero indicate bullish momentum). Incomplete for effective use.

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 0% and description adds no information about parameters. The 'period' parameter is central to ROC but not described. Limit, interval, and symbol are also ignored. Agent has to infer from schema alone.

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 it's about Rate of Change indicator as percentage price change, which is clear. However, it doesn't specify the resource type (e.g., historical values) and doesn't differentiate from other sibling indicators beyond being a different technical analysis tool.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, best practices, or scenarios where ROC is preferred over other indicators like momentum or moving averages.

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