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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the tier-dependent history depth (30-365 days) and the returned stats, which is meaningful beyond a bare 'get'. It does not mention rate limits or data freshness, but for a read-only tool this is adequate.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences cover purpose, output stats, and a key limitation without redundancy. Every sentence 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?

Given the low complexity (2 params, no output schema), the description provides the essential return info (stats and history range). It omits pagination/error behavior, but for this tool the description is largely 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?

The schema already describes both parameters fully (100% coverage), including the default for 'days'. The description only adds the tier-dependent depth context, which is already reflected in the schema's 'days' description, so no significant extra semantic value is provided.

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 action ('Get historical price data') and the target resource ('product'), and differentiates from siblings by emphasizing time-series stats (lowest, highest, average). It is specific and unambiguous.

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 implies use when price history or trend statistics are needed, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. There is no exclusion or alternative naming, so guidance remains implied rather than explicit.

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