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

There are no annotations, and the description offers no behavioral details such as data source, output format, or side effects. It merely states 'run backtest' without disclosing what the agent should expect or any limitations.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. The period note is useful and directly relevant. No extraneous content; however, it is so brief that it sacrifices completeness.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 4 parameters but only one explained, the description is materially incomplete. It fails to describe fast/slow parameters or return value expectations, making it insufficient for a strategy backtest tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains only `period` (history window with examples and default), but omits fast, slow, and ticker. This leaves the core SMA parameters undefined, adding only partial value.

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 function: 'Run SMA crossover strategy backtest.' This uses a specific verb (Run) and resource (SMA crossover strategy backtest), distinguishing it from sibling tools like backtest_macd_momentum or backtest_rsi_mean_reversion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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