get_kline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the tool's read-only nature (historical data), the types of K-lines, rehab options, and a version limitation. Missing details include potential rate limits, response format, and error handling. No contradiction with annotations (none exist).

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 well-structured: it starts with the purpose, then lists parameter constraints and usage patterns. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant 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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides a good overview but lacks details on return format, error handling, and edge cases. The limitation about US intraday is noted, but additional context like pagination or data source would improve completeness.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description adds significant meaning by explicitly listing valid values for ktype and rehab, and explaining the use of start, end, and num. It covers almost all parameters except 'code', which is self-explanatory. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get K-line / candlestick / historical price'. It lists supported ktype values, rehab options, and the two modes of operation (range vs latest bars). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_snapshot or other historical data tools.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use start+end vs num, and notes a limitation ('US intraday session not exposed in v1'). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternative tools among siblings.

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