get_price_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains what the tool returns (snapshots and summary) but does not mention any side effects, data freshness, or limitations. It is not contradictory, but lacks depth beyond the output description.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and derived summary. Every word contributes to understanding, with no redundancy or filler.

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 tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema exists, so return values are covered elsewhere. However, missing usage guidelines and lack of behavioral context make it incomplete for an agent deciding when to call it, especially given the many similar siblings.

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 schema has one parameter (listing_id) with 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention or elaborate on it. While the parameter name is self-explanatory, the description adds no value beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 provides 'Price/mileage/status snapshots and the derived summary' with specific derived fields (days on market, drops, absolute/percent change). This is a specific verb+resource, but it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_status or find_price_drops, though the derived summary concept sets it apart implicitly.

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 such as get_status, get_listing_changes, or find_price_drops. There is no mention of context, exclusions, or recommended alternatives, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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