romaco_find_levels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently describes the algorithm (K-means clustering, Volume Profile), the output format, and the underlying data source (candle data). It does not mention any destructive or permission-related behavior, which is appropriate for a read-only analysis tool.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) yet packs all essential information: purpose, algorithm, output details, and a prerequisite. Every sentence adds value, and the main action is 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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity and the absence of an output schema, the description provides complete context: it explains what the tool does, how it works, what it returns, and what prerequisite actions are needed. No additional information is necessary for proper selection and 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. Since there are no parameters, the description does not need to add parameter details. According to guidelines, baseline is 4 for zero parameters.

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 finds key support and resistance levels using K-means clustering and Volume Profile, specifies the number of levels returned (up to 3 each), and details the output fields (touch count, strength, last test timestamp). This distinguishes it from sibling analysis tools like romaco_detect_patterns and romaco_analyze_market.

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 includes a prerequisite ('Call romaco_load_candles first'), which is helpful, but it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like romaco_detect_patterns or romaco_analyze_market. No explicit when-not or comparative context is given.

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