Capture TradingView Supercharts

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent/non-destructive behavior, and the description adds useful context that authentication details are excluded from the result. However, it does not disclose the output format or whether the snapshot reflects current chart state and overlays, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and target, with no filler or redundancy. The second sentence adds important auth-exclusion context and 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?

With no output schema, the description should clarify what the returned snapshot is, such as an image URL, base64 data, or file reference, but it only mentions that auth details are excluded. For a simple capture tool with strong annotations and optional size parameters, it is adequate but incomplete around return semantics.

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 3 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain width, height, or chartOnly. The phrase 'chart region or viewport' only weakly maps to chartOnly, so the description fails to compensate for the missing parameter documentation.

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 captures the official TradingView chart region or viewport for visual analysis, providing a clear verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like chart_snapshot or tradingview_export_chart, so it stops short of 5.

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 phrase 'for visual analysis' implies when to use the tool, and the chart/viewport scope helps clarify intent. But no explicit when-not guidance or alternatives are provided despite many closely related sibling tools, leaving usage guidance minimal.

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