indicator_vwap

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the formula. It does not explain how limit/timeframe affect the calculation, whether the tool fetches its own data, or what the return value looks like.

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 sentence, but it is slightly redundant: 'Volume Weighted Average Price' is already expanded in the acronym and then restated as 'average price weighted by volume.' Still, it is concise and front-loaded.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, and the description omits the return value format, calculation window, and whether it uses the provided limit to fetch data. For a calculation tool, more context is needed to use it 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 input schema provides complete descriptions for all three parameters (symbol, limit, timeframe), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the formula, but the schema already covers the parameter meanings.

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 VWAP, a specific indicator, and defines it as 'average price weighted by volume.' This distinguishes it from sibling indicator tools like indicator_sma or indicator_ema, which calculate different metrics.

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 provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives. It does not mention that it fetches OHLCV data, nor does it differentiate between indicator_vwap and strategy_vwap, which also appears in the sibling tools list.

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