romaco_analyze_market

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

With no annotations, the description effectively discloses behavioral traits: server-side computation with fallback (if token is Pro), approximate output size (~500 tokens), and that it returns structured features instead of raw OHLCV. It does not mention state modifications, but analysis is likely read-only.

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 and front-loaded with the main action. It efficiently lists contained analyses and adds prerequisite and return info. Very concise but packed with information.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description provides sufficient context: what it does, prerequisite, server-side behavior, and output nature. It does not detail exact output format, but for a tool with no parameters, this is adequate.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description adds no parameter info. Per guidelines, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4.

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 it runs full technical analysis on candle data and returns a MarketSummary. It lists comprehensive components (trend, patterns, levels, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools like romaco_detect_patterns or romaco_find_levels by being a broader analysis.

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 explicitly states to call romaco_load_candles first, providing a clear prerequisite. However, it does not specify when to use this vs. other analysis tools or mention alternative tools for specific analyses.

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