Get market indicator candles

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

The description is consistent with the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations and contains no contradictions. However, it adds minimal behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide—no mention of pagination, rate limits, or other runtime behavior.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to stating the tool's core purpose.

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?

For a read-only tool with good annotations, the description states the return type and intervals, which is adequate. However, it omits pagination details, sibling differentiation, and any guidance on symbol resolution, leaving gaps that the schema partially fills.

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?

The description clarifies the interval parameter ('1-minute or daily') and the output type (OHLCV), but it does not explain count or before semantics. With schema description coverage at 50%, the description only partially compensates for the undocumented before parameter.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Returns 1-minute or daily OHLCV candles for a market indicator.' It clearly distinguishes this from generic candle tools by mentioning 'market indicator,' but it does not explicitly name sibling 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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are exclusions or prerequisites mentioned. The schema's symbol description mentions calling toss_resolve_symbol first, but the tool description itself lacks any usage direction.

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