get_rate_historyGet historical OHLC (open/high/low/close) candles for a currency pair over a period.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| base | Yes | Base asset symbol, e.g. BTC | |
| quote | No | Quote currency symbol. Defaults to USD. | |
| period | No | History period. Defaults to 7d. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations are empty, so the description carries full burden. It reveals that data is historical OHLC for a period, which is adequate but does not disclose details like supported pairs, data granularity, or response size. For a simple read tool, this is minimally acceptable.
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 sentence that front-loads the key information with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool.
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 is simple with 3 parameters and no output schema or nested objects. The description covers the essential purpose and data type (OHLC candles). Though it does not specify response format, it is reasonably complete for an experienced agent.
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 100%, so the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. The description's mention of 'currency pair' and 'period' aligns with parameters, but no additional clarification 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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'historical OHLC candles for a currency pair over a period'. It is specific and distinguishes this tool from siblings like convert_currency and get_latest_rates.
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 such as convert_currency or get_latest_rates. The description lacks any contextual or conditional advice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool serves a distinct purpose: conversion, current rates, historical rates, and service status. There is no overlap in functionality.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using lowercase and underscores, making them predictable and easy to understand.
With 4 tools, the server is well-scoped for a price feed service, covering essential operations without unnecessary bloat.
The tool set covers key operations: conversion, current rates, historical data, and service status. No obvious gaps for the stated domain.