get_macd

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It mentions the session/broker dependency but does not disclose return format, required authentication state, error behavior, or whether it is read-only. It also doesn't explain how parameters like fast_period or to_date affect the calculation.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, with no filler or redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool has 8 parameters, a moderately complex domain (technical indicators), and no output schema or annotations. The description only provides the basic purpose and a hint about broker sessions; it lacks any guidance on how the parameters relate (e.g., period interactions, date range validation) or what the response will contain. This is insufficient for correct invocation without further context.

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 fully documents all 8 parameters with descriptions, including defaults for the period parameters. The tool description itself does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'MACD (Moving Average Convergence Divergence)', and clarifies the data source ('from active or specific broker in your session'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling indicator tools like get_rsi or get_adx.

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 provides clear context that a broker session is required and indicates the ability to choose a specific broker, which is a useful usage condition. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, such as using get_technical_indicators for multiple indicators.

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