tickerbot_get_signals_match

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 important behavioral traits: support for historical queries via 'asof', sorting behavior for numerics, and the condition requirement for numerics. Missing details like pagination, error handling, or universe defaults, but this is adequate for a read/filter 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and no wasted words. Every sentence adds meaningful information about usage and behavior.

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?

For a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers core behaviors well: temporal queries, condition syntax, and sorting. It doesn't describe the output rows or mention the 'universe' parameter default, but the schema covers parameter details. Overall, it is adequate for someone to start using the tool correctly.

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 covers 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds significant value by giving concrete examples for 'condition' (e.g., '>70', '<=200'), explaining the 'asof' behavior, and noting sort order. This goes beyond the bare schema definitions.

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's purpose: 'Find tickers that match a single signal right now (or at a past moment...)'. It uses a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('tickers'), and the scope of matching one signal distinguishes it from broader tools like tickerbot_scan.

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 clear context on how to use the tool, including the distinction between boolean and numeric signals, the need for a 'condition' for numerics, and the 'asof' parameter for past moments. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this instead of alternatives like scanning or signal event listing.

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