get_stash_history

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that each snapshot is valued at the prices in effect when taken, separating quantity changes from price changes. This is substantive context beyond a generic 'returns history'. It omits minor operational details like limits or snapshot cadence, but the core behavior is clear.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, with no filler. The second sentence earns its place by explaining the valuation methodology.

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 output schema covers return shape, but the tool still lacks guidance on league selection and limit semantics, which are the only inputs. Overall it is understandable but leaves parameter-level decisions to inference.

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 0%, so the description needed to explain the two parameters, but it mentions neither 'league' nor 'limit'. The names are partially self-explanatory, but no description states that limit caps snapshots or which league's stash is queried.

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?

States a specific verb ('Track') and resource ('your stash's total value') with the temporal dimension 'over time'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_stash_value (current value) and get_price_history (item prices).

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 purpose implies use for historical stash valuation, and the snapshot-pricing note helps set expectations, but it never explicitly names when to prefer this over get_stash_value or get_price_history, nor states any exclusions.

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