send_trade_alert

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: the tool does not place orders, returns a dict with 'preview', and the message text is always included. This is good transparency for a notification tool, though it could mention error handling or Telegram configuration 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?

The description is relatively short (two sentences plus a list of allowed values). It conveys the core purpose efficiently, but the structure could be improved by grouping parameter details or using clearer formatting. It is not overly verbose, but it lacks organization of parameter information.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides moderate completeness. It explains the primary function and return value structure but lacks details on parameter semantics, failure modes, and Telegram integration specifics. The agent would need additional context to use all parameters correctly.

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 description only mentions side, trade_type, and mode as examples of allowed values (BUY/SELL, intraday/delivery, paper/live). With 10 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, this is insufficient to help an agent understand the meaning and proper values for parameters like entry, stop_loss, target, rationale, or validity.

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 the tool formats and sends a trade recommendation to Telegram in notify-only mode. It explicitly distinguishes from order execution tools by stating it does not place any order, which helps differentiate from siblings like execute_intraday_order_after_validation.

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 specifies it is 'used in notify-only mode' and explicitly says it sends a recommendation only, not an order. It also explains that the preview can be surfaced inline if Telegram is not configured. No explicit alternatives are named, but the context is clear for when to use this tool versus execution tools.

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