romaco_load_candles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that data persists across the session, and that the default source is free with no auth required. This goes beyond schema information. However, it does not mention whether reloading overwrites existing data or any rate limits.

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 plus a note, all front-loaded with the main function. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary 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?

Considering the 5 parameters with full schema descriptions, no output schema, and sibling tools focused on analysis/charting, the description adequately explains the tool's role, persistence behavior, and source options. It could mention confirmation behavior on success, but it is sufficiently complete.

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% (all parameters have descriptions). The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides for parameters. The description's mention of source options is valuable but does not specifically enhance parameter semantics beyond baseline.

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 verb 'load', the resource 'OHLCV candle data', and the effect 'persists in the MCP session'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings, which are analysis or chart manipulation tools.

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 explains when to use each source ('yfinance' vs 'raw'), notes that default source is free and requires no authentication, and indicates that data persists for subsequent analysis. It does not explicitly say when not to use the tool, but the context is clear enough.

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