Get Historical Prices Tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the kind of data returned (OHLC) and does not describe ordering, adjustment behavior, timezone handling, error behavior, or whether the operation is strictly read-only beyond the verb 'Get'.

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 identifying the resource and data type.

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 simple two-parameter retrieval tool with complete schema documentation and an output schema present, the description is adequate to enable invocation. It does not cover usage distinctions or behavioral edge cases, but those are covered in other dimensions and the tool name/sibling context supplies additional orientation.

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 100%, with ticker and period both documented in the input schema, including permitted period values and the default. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond mentioning 'ticker', so the baseline of 3 applies.

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: 'Get historical OHLC price data for a ticker.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like get_stock_quote_tool (current quote vs historical) and get_company_overview_tool (fundamentals vs price data).

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 word 'historical' implies when this tool is appropriate, but the description does not explicitly say when to use it over get_stock_quote_tool or mention any exclusions. Usage context is implied rather than stated.

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