indicator_rsi

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

There are no annotations, so the description must disclose behavioral details, but it only states the calculation and purpose. It does not describe the output format, data source (OHLCV), or how limit/period affect results, leaving key behaviors undisclosed.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the tool's function immediately. Every phrase earns its place, with no redundant detail.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description is too sparse. It lacks return value details, input examples, or any mention of how the indicator is calculated beyond the generic RSI definition, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand tool behavior.

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?

All four parameters have schema descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter context, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is appropriate.

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 calculates the Relative Strength Index (RSI), a specific technical indicator, and explains its purpose. The verb 'Calculate' and the resource 'Relative Strength Index' are explicit and distinguish it from sibling tools like indicator_macd or strategy_rsi2.

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 a use case via 'identify overbought/oversold conditions,' but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose RSI over other indicators or when not to use it. No alternative tools are named, leaving the agent to infer suitability.

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