get_chart_data

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

The description discloses the fallback behavior and the intraday limitation of Upstox, which adds transparency beyond a simple 'fetch data' statement. Without annotations, it carries the burden but still lacks details on error handling, rate limits, or any side effects.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. The most critical information (action, sources, limitation) is front-loaded. 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?

The description covers the core functionality and data sources. However, it lacks details about the output format (e.g., OHLCV fields) and does not address edge cases like missing data or symbol validation. Given the absence of an output schema, the description could be more 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (all three parameters have descriptions in the JSON Schema). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline. No additional semantics like value constraints or interplay between parameters are 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 ('Fetch chart candle data') and the resource ('for a given symbol'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning the fallback behavior (Upstox then Yahoo Finance), but does not explicitly differentiate from similar data-fetch tools like get_fii_dii_data or get_pcr.

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 usage context by stating the data source and the intraday limitation ('Checks Upstox first (intraday only)'). However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as analyze_chart or get_market_mode, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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