romaco_add_drawing

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses optional fields (style, paneId, groupId), how style is mapped server-side, and group inclusion/exclusion behavior. Lacks mention of rate limits or idempotency, but mutation intent is clear.

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?

Dense but efficient: front-loaded with core action, then key details (templates, point requirements, optional fields, helper tools, subpanel usage). Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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?

Handles complexity well: 6 parameters, nested objects, 33 templates. Covers prerequisites (helper tools), optional fields, and subpanel use case. No output schema, but mutation tool doesn't need return value explanation. Fully prepares agent.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds significant meaning: enumerates 33 template types, explains point counts for different templates, clarifies paneId with example (RSI=70), and describes style mapping. Far exceeds schema alone.

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?

States 'Draw a technical-analysis shape on the chart' with a specific verb and resource. Lists 33 templates explicitly, distinguishing it from siblings like romaco_clear_drawings or romaco_draw_pattern.

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 explicit guidance: use romaco_list_templates to discover point counts, romaco_get_visible_candles for anchor timestamps/prices, and romaco_list_panes for indicator sub-panels. Includes when-not-to-use info via sibling references.

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