romaco_get_chart_context

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

The description fully discloses the token cost difference (1 KB compressed vs 80 KB raw), the condition for opting into the raw payload, and what the raw payload includes (visible candles, drawings with points, indicator params, capability registries). With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and excels.

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, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and every sentence adds value. No unnecessary words or 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?

Given the simple parameter set and no output schema, the description covers default contents, optional raw contents, and usage advice. It is fully self-contained and leaves no ambiguity about behavior.

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 single parameter acknowledgeHighTokenCost is documented in both schema and description. The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the schema's warning: it specifies what exactly the raw payload contains and reiterates the condition for use. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the added value justifies a 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 retrieves a compressed snapshot of the chart state, listing specific contents (last price, pane list, indicator/drawing/alert counts, visible range, zoom, render backend). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like romaco_get_visible_candles or romaco_get_indicator_values by offering a broader summary.

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?

It explicitly advises when to use the raw payload (only when the user explicitly asks and accepts token cost), implying the compressed version is the default. It does not explicitly compare with siblings, but the purpose is clear enough for appropriate selection.

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