get_rsi

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses that the tool returns 'RSI values with interpretation' and explains the meaning of the indicator. It does not mention rate limits or data freshness, but it is sufficiently transparent for a simple read operation.

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 well-structured with a brief overview, a bulleted list for parameters, and a returns line. It is front-loaded with the RSI interpretation, though the 'Args:' and 'Returns:' headers could be omitted for conciseness.

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 presence of an output schema (though unseen) and many sibling indicators, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose, parameters, and output interpretation. It could mention error handling or time zone assumptions, but it is complete enough for an agent.

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%, but the description compensates by listing each parameter (symbol, interval, period, limit, start_time, end_time) with clear examples and defaults, adding significant meaning beyond the 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 clearly specifies 'Get RSI' for a cryptocurrency, explains the RSI scale (0-100) with oversold/overbought thresholds, and provides examples. This distinguishes it from sibling indicators.

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 context through the RSI interpretation (oversold/overbought signals) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_stochrsi or get_mfi, nor does it provide exclusion criteria.

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