Nse Get Historical

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the 1-year-per-call window limit, a real behavioral constraint not present anywhere else, but says nothing about rate limits, authentication, market-holiday gaps, or what happens when a requested range exceeds a year.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the resource first and appends the key constraint in parentheses. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value shape need not be explained, and all parameters are documented in the schema. For a simple three-parameter read tool the description is nearly complete; the only real omission is what to expect when the window or pagination limits are hit.

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 coverage is 100%, so all three parameters already carry their own descriptions and the baseline is 3. The description adds one useful piece of meaning not in the schema, the 1-year window cap, but contributes nothing about symbol format expectations or the interaction between from_date and to_date.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get NSE daily OHLCV history for a symbol') and specifies the data granularity (daily OHLCV), which is far more specific than the title. It does not, however, name or contrast itself with the obvious sibling nse_get_quote, so an agent must infer the historical-vs-live distinction on its own.

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?

Usage is only implied: the word 'history' suggests this is for past data rather than live quotes, but no alternative tool is named and no when-not condition is given. The '(max 1 year window per call)' note hints at the need to chunk long ranges but stops short of instructing how.

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