ig_get_historical_prices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses two behavioral traits: offset-aware range (timezone handling) and reusable cached periods. This is more transparent than typical minimal descriptions, though it does not mention rate limits or return format nuances.

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, well-structured sentence that leads with the action and resource, followed by two key qualifiers. No wasted words.

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 has 5 required parameters and no annotations, but the description provides no context for correct invocation. While an output schema exists, the input side is underspecified, leaving the user uncertain about parameter formats and allowed values.

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 coverage is 0% and the description does not explain any parameters. The mention of 'offset-aware' vaguely suggests timezone's role, but it fails to clarify formats, valid resolutions, or date/time expectations. Parameters are left entirely to the user's domain knowledge.

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 specifies a clear action ('Get historical OHLC prices') with qualifiers ('offset-aware range', 'reusing cached periods') that distinguish it from siblings like ig_get_current_candle. It clearly identifies the resource and scope.

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?

Usage is implied: the tool is for retrieving historical prices. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives or any exclusion criteria, though the mention of caching hints at repeated queries.

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