Open TradingView Supercharts

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

The description adds valuable context beyond the annotations: authentication is loaded only from a configured local state/cookie file and is never returned. This clarifies privacy and side-effect behavior without contradicting the annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource, followed by a necessary authentication note. Every word earns its place with no repetition or filler.

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?

Despite clear purpose and a useful auth caveat, the description does not explain return behavior, layoutId, interval options, or when to use this tool over chart_open. With no output schema and low parameter coverage, this leaves important gaps 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 only 33%, and the description mentions symbol and interval but does not explain the interval format, defaults, or layoutId semantics. The full burden is on the description, and it does not compensate for the undocumented parameters.

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 ('Open') and identifies the exact resource ('official TradingView Supercharts UI') for a validated symbol and interval. It is clear, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'chart_open' 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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like chart_open or the other tradingview_* tools. The intended usage is implied by the action verb, but no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative recommendations are stated.

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