get_atr

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 does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, what happens if no active broker is found, authentication requirements, or potential errors. The only behavioral hint is the need for a broker session, which is insufficient.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose. It is front-loaded with the essential function and avoids superfluous words.

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?

With 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal to be considered complete. It fails to explain how ATR is calculated, the role of date ranges, interval handling, or what the response contains. The schema describes fields, but the overall behavior and use case remain ambiguous.

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%, so all six parameters have descriptions. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond 'symbol' and 'broker' context, effectively relying on the schema. It does not clarify interactions between parameters like period, from_date, to_date, or interval.

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 function: 'Get ATR (Average True Range) for a symbol', specifying both the verb and resource. It also notes 'from active or specific broker in your session', which distinguishes it from other technical indicator tools like get_rsi or get_macd by focusing on ATR.

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 mentions 'from active or specific broker in your session', implying the tool requires an active broker session, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. Usage context is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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