get_signals

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

With readOnlyHint already declaring the operation safe, the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond naming the data source ('T-Investments'). It omits what constitutes a signal, pagination behavior, rate limits, or what happens when no signals exist.

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?

Single concise sentence with no redundancy, though front-loaded with the critical verb and resource. However, extreme brevity comes at the cost of explanatory power for a multi-parameter financial tool.

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?

Absent output schema and zero description of return values leaves critical gaps—agents cannot know what signal data structure, fields (price, confidence, timestamps), or format to expect upon successful invocation.

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 100% with clear Russian-language descriptions for all 5 parameters (tickers, date range, direction, limit). The description does not add parameter semantics, but the schema documentation is complete enough that additional text is unnecessary.

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?

Clearly states the specific action (get) and resource (trading signals from T-Investments), but lacks differentiation from sibling tools like get_tech_analysis or get_consensus_forecasts that also provide trading-related data.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to prefer signals over technical analysis or consensus forecasts), nor any prerequisites or filtering recommendations.

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