get_token_chart_data

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention return format, resolution behavior, or any constraints. The description is purely functional with no additional behavioral context.

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. It avoids filler but may be too terse given the tool's complexity, though it earns credit for not repeating schema information.

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 tool's complexity (12 params, no output schema), the description is grossly incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'bar chart data' specifically contains, how resolutions work, or what the response looks like. Sibling tools don't fill this gap.

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 50%, so some parameters have descriptions. The description adds meaning to the 'address' parameter by noting it can be a pair or token address, but it does not clarify other parameters like countback, statsType, or currencyCode. Since coverage is not below 50%, the baseline is acceptable but the description adds minimal 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 it 'Returns bar chart data to track token price changes over time,' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning bar chart data and dual query options (pair or token address), though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_token_prices or get_token_sparklines. It only explains how to query (pair or token address) but not the context for choosing it over sibling tools.

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