analyze

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that it fetches candles locally and sends only numeric data to the API, and that it requires a TRADE_ANALYTICS_API_KEY. This provides good transparency, though error cases or side effects are not mentioned.

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 two sentences with no redundant information. It front-loads the purpose and mentions key outputs and prerequisites concisely.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description covers the core purpose and some parameter hints but fails to explain several parameters (session, timezone, timeframe, max_candles) clearly. Overall adequate but with gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the trades array structure and the stop parameter for R-multiples, and mentions point_value for P&L. However, other parameters like session, timezone, timeframe, and max_candles are not explained.

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 analyzes trades and lists specific metrics (MAE/MFE, R-multiple, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools like resolve_symbol or render.

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 mentions it is PAID and needs an API key, and gives hints on input structure (add stop for R-multiples). However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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